Mohammed Musthafa v. State Rep. By. Forest Range Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Mohammed Musthafa ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Forest Range Officer, South Range, Ooty, (W.L.O.R.No.2 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in W.L.O.R.No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police and pass orders.

For Petitioner :

Mr.J. Franklin For Respondent :

Ms. J.R. Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 21(1)(2), 9,39 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 in W.L.O.R No.2 of 2025, on the file of the respondent, seek anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that this petitioner joined hands with other accused involved in hunting Indian Gaur by using crossbow and while they were attempting to transport the animal in the vehicle they caught red handed. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any other stringent conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that this petitioner involved in the act of hunting wild animals and also attempted to transport them. He further submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle involved in transporting the wild animal and investigation in this case is pending and there is one previous case pending against the petitioner. 2/4

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by both sides and the nature of offence; the fact that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle involved in transporting wild animal and the bad antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 10.02.2026 smn To 1.The Forest Range Officer, South Range, Ooty, 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

smn 10.02.2026 4/4