S.Bakrudeen Ali Ahmed v. The Forest Range Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT (Criminal Jurisdiction) Dated: 04/08/2023 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD)No.13667 of 2023 S.Bakrudeen Ali Ahmed : Petitioner/A1 Vs.

The Forest Ranger Officer, Keelakarai Range, Ramanathapuram District.

(W.L.O.R No.12 of 2023) : Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.C.Jeganathan For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER:- For Anticipatory Bail in W.L.O.R No.12 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent.

ORDER: The Court made the following order:- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences

punishable under sections 2(11), 9, 39(1)(a)(b), 39(2), 39(3), 42, 49D(n), 49H(1), 40I(1), 50 and 51 Schedule-II Part-E (Fishes) of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (Amended Act) 2022, in W.L.O.R No.12 of 2023 on the file of the respondent, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 13/07/2023 at about 06.00 pm, on secret information, the complainant party went to inspect one Moor Travels Parcel Service office at Keelakarai. On search, they found a pack containing 97 kgs of Shark filets. Finding that it is a prohibited commodity, as per the provisions of sections 2(11), 9, 39(1)(a)(b), 39(2), 39(3), 42, 49D(n), 49H(1), 491(1), 50 and 51 Schedule-II Part E(Fishes) of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (Amended Act) 2020, the occurrence report was registered.

3.Seeking anticipatory bail, this petition has been filed by the petitioner stating that based upon the confession statement of A2, this petitioner has been arrayed as an accused. The statement of A2 shows that this petitioner only sent the above said fillets to Seeni Mohamed, who is A2. In the statement, he has stated that

this petitioner alleged to have sent the above said parcel stating that it is dry fish. Without knowing the contents of the same, he took the consignment for delivery.

4.So, the question, which arises for consideration is whether the recovered articles are banned commodities as per the provisions of Wild Life Protection Act. 5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the above said fillets have been sent for Forensic Laboratory and only examination by the Laboratory will show, whether it is a banned fillets or not. Since, A2 has already been remanded to custody. 6.Considering the fact that so far, whether the above said commodity is a banned or not is not finalized, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. During the course of investigation, if it is found the above said article is a banned one and if any custodial interrogation is required, the respondent is at liberty to move the concerned court for appropriate orders. This order will not stand as a bar for initiating the above said proceedings.

6.In view of the above, this petition is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1. Ramanathapuram and on 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 Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No 04/08/2023 er

G.ILANGOVAN, J er To, 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Forest Range Officer, Keelakarai Range, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Crl.OP(MD)No.13667 of 2023 04/08/2023