Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Satheesh Vs. State of Kerala

Satheesh vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 20, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1141068

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satheesh

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....learned public prosecutor has pointed out that the second accused is involved in a series of similar cases wherein wild animals were shot dead. there is no allegation against the petitioners that they have poached or hunted any wild animal. no criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the present stage of investigation and the absence of criminal antecedents against the petitioners, i do not think that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required for the continued investigation of this case. matters being so, i am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.5. in the result, this bail application is allowed and ba.2664/2014 :3. : the investigating officer or such other officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for `50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) the petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all tuesdays and fridays, commencing from 27.05.2014 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier. (ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (iii) the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer. (iv) the petitioners shall not involve in any offence while on bail. ba.2664/2014 :4. : it is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail. sd/- (b.kemal pasha, judge) aks/20/05 // true copy // pa to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA TUESDAY, THE20H DAY OF MAY201430TH VAISAKHA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 2664 of 2014 () ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN CRMP7462014 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD DATED2903-2014 CRIME NO. 1/2014 OF NELLIAMPATHY FOREST RANGE OFFICE , PALAKKAD PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.3 TO6 ----------------------------------------------------- 1. SATHEESH, AGED32YEARS S/O.KUTTAN, NELLIKKATTU PARAMBU HOUSE N.S.S COLLEGE P.O., NEMMARA, PALAKKAD2 DILEEPKUMAR, AGED28YEARS S/O.RAJAN, KUNNAMKAD HOUSE, KARIMKULAM THIRUVAZHIYAD P.O., NEMMARA, PALAKKAD.

3. BABU, AGED26YEARS S/O.CHANDRAN, KARIMKULAM, THIRUVAZHIYAD P.O. NEMMARA, PALAKKAD.

4. R.RAJESH, AGED37YEARS S/O.RAJAN, KARIMKULAM, THIRUVAZHIYAD P.O. NEMMARA, PALAKKAD BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------- STATEOF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING THE FOREST OFFICER NELLIYAMPATHY FOREST RANGE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA R. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2005-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No.2664 of 2014 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 20th day of May, 2014 ORDER

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos.3 to 6 in O.R. No.1/2014 of Nelliyampathy Forest Range registered for the offences punishable under Sections 2(1), 2(2), 2(11), 2(16), 2(22), 2(31), 2(35), 2(36), 9, 39, 40, 44, 49(A), 49(B), 50, 51 and 56 of the Wild Life Protection Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they were invited by A1 and A2 and they were supplied with cooked meat of hedgehog, a wild animal, and knowingly they have consumed the meat.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and BA.2664/2014 :

2. : the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the CD. The only allegation against the petitioners is that they had consumed the cooked meat of a wild animal supplied by A1 and A2. The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that the second accused is involved in a series of similar cases wherein wild animals were shot dead. There is no allegation against the petitioners that they have poached or hunted any wild animal. No criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the present stage of investigation and the absence of criminal antecedents against the petitioners, I do not think that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required for the continued investigation of this case. Matters being so, I am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

5. In the result, this Bail Application is allowed and BA.2664/2014 :

3. : the investigating officer or such other officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Tuesdays and Fridays, commencing from 27.05.2014 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier. (ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer. (iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any offence while on bail. BA.2664/2014 :

4. : It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail. Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/20/05 // True Copy // PA to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial