V. Saravanakumar v. The Forest Ranger
Crl.OP(MD)Nos.354 and 355 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Dated: 09/02/2022 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD)Nos.354 and 355 of 2022 1.V.Saravanakumar : Petitioner/Accused No.1 IN CRL OP(MD) No.354 of 2022 2.V.Murugan : Petitioner/Accused No.2 IN CRL OP(MD) No.355 of 2022 Vs.
The State rep. Through The Forest Ranger, Srivilliputtur Forest Range, IN WL.OR No.13 of 2021 : Respondents/Complainants in both petitions For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selvakumar, Advocate in both petitions For Respondent : Mr.SS.Madhavan Government Advocate (Crl.side) in both petitions PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in WL.OR No.13 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order:- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 and A2 apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under sections 2(16), 9, 39, 50, 51 of Wild Life Protection At, 1972, in WLOR No.13 of 2021 seek anticipatory bail. 2.The petitioners are facing the charges 2(16), 9, 39, 50, 51 of Wild Life Protection At, 1972, 3.Heard both sides.
4.The earlier anticipatory application filed by the petitioners was dismissed, after elaborately considering the argument that has been advanced by the petitioners. The second anticipatory bail applications was moved on the very same ground. Even though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the offence is punishable only upto 7 years, they are entitled for anticipatory bail. Considering the seriousness of the offence, the earlier application was dismissed that A1 is involved in similar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
Crl.OP(MD)Nos.354 and 355 of 2022 cases. In the previous cases, it is also seen that A1 has also involved in heinous offence of such nature. So A1 is not entitled for anticipatory bail. In respect of A2, as mentioned earlier, even though dismissal of the above said anticipatory bail, no steps have been taken by the Investigating Officer to arrest A2. So, A2 is granted interim anticipatory bail for two months. As against A1 this anticipatory bail petition is dismissed.
5.In view of the above facts and circumstances of case, this Court is inclined to grant interim anticipatory bail to A2 alone for the purpose of completing the investigation process by the respondent with certain conditions. Accordingly, A2 is granted interim anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate NO.II, Srivilliputtur and his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that A2 shall appear before the respondent police once in 15 days at 10.00 a.m. for the purpose of completing the investigation process. During the course of investigation process, if the involvement of A2 is also brought on record, further orders will be passed depending upon the subsequent development. sd/- 09/02/2022 / TRUE COPY / / /2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, SRIVILLIPUTTUR.
2. DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTTUR.
3. THE FOREST RANGER, SRIVILIPUTTUR FOREST RANGE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.
4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+4 CC to M/s.V.SELVAKUMAR, Advocate SR-940 & 941. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.354&355 of 2022 Date :09/02/2022 USK/PN/SAR-I/16.02.2022/2P/9C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2