Anus v. State Rep By The Forest Range Officer

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 2(1b), 391(a) and (b) r/w 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, in WLOR No.2 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in illegal possession of Gun, Headlight, Binocular, Cartridge, empty cartridge, electronic weighing machine, bullets, small sheathed knife, 1⁄2 Kg flesh, antlers in his house. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the

petitioner was found in possession of wild animal flesh and hunting equipments in his house. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner committed very serious offence as against the wild animals. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required in this case. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24.08.2022 ata G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

ata 24.08.2022