V R Ravichandran v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/04/2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL V.R.Ravichandran ... Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Forest Range Officer, Thuraiyur Forest Range, Thuraiyur, Trichy District.
(W.L.O.R.No. 08/2025). ... Respondent/complainant PRAYER :- To enlarge the petitioner on Bail in connection with the case W.L.O.R.No.08 of 2025 on the file of the respodent police and pass orders as this Hon`ble court For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sivabalan for M/s. Aran Legal Consultancy, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 2(6), 9, 39 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, in Crime No.8 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.11.2025 at about 01.30 a.m, on information, the respondent police went to the agricultural field of the petitioner and found three dead peacocks. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that and the petitioner is said to have mixed pesticide in the paddy in order to kill the rats and other birds which disturbed his agricultural activities. Only based on the suspicious, the petitioner is arrayed as accused and no previous case is pending against him. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
2/6
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the offence is grave in nature. However, he fairly conceded that no previous case is pending against him.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and only based on the suspicious, the petitioner is arrayed as accused and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute 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 Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur, and on further 3/6
conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent every Saturday at 10.30 a.m for a period of 4 weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
4/6
09.04.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur.
2.The Forest Range Officer, Thuraiyur Forest Range, Thuraiyur, Trichy District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
P. DHANABAL,J DSS 5/6
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.6806 of 2026 Date : 09/04/2026 6/6