Mohammed Razul v. State Rep. By The Forest Range Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Mohammed Razul

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs.

State rep by The Forest Range Officer, Forest Range Headquarters, Chennai.

(STOR No.01 of 2025) ...

Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in STOR No.01 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Gopikrishnan For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No.1 of 6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.02.2025, seeking bail in STOR No.01 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 5, 35, 36, 36(A), 36(B), 36(E), 41, 49(A), 51, 56, 56(A), 56(B), 56(D) of Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that based on a secret information, the respondent and their officials went to the scene of occurrence and found the petitioner in possession of 887 kgs of red sander logs. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations are false; that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and that the contraband has been seized and the petitioner is in custody from 22.02.2025 and that in any case, his further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation and sought for bail.

Page No.2 of 6

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the contraband has been seized and the petitioner has no bad antecedents.

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

6.Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, the fact that the contraband was seized, the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and since further custody of the petitioner is not required, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the II Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

Page No.3 of 6

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

17.03.2025 ata Page No.4 of 6

Copy to:

1.The Forest Range Officer, Forest Range Headquarters, Chennai.

2.The II Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai. 3.Central Prison, Puzhal.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Page No.5 of 6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

ata 17.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6