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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mohammed Musthafa ..Petitioner Vs State rep. by.

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 Forest Range Officer.

For Petitioner:

Mr.J. Franklin For Respondent:

Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 2(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 police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution 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 falsely 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 to grant 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 case 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. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

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

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 02-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order NSL

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL To

1. The Forest Range Officer, South Range, Ooty.

2. The Inspector of Police, High Court of Madras.

02-06-2026