Binu vs State of Kerala

BINU vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Mar 28, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1447792

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1447792
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.
Decided On: Mar 28, 2022
Case Number: Bail Appl./937/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

BINU

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....of a boar, which had died on account of its fall into a well. it is submitted that the petitioner and the other accused had not killed any wild animal and therefore, the allegations against the petitioner are baseless. ..3..5. the learned public prosecutor points out that the allegation iscelarly that the wild boar had fallen into the well after tripping over a snare illegally fixed by accused 3 and 4 and that as already noted, the petitioner is the 3rd accused in the case. it is submitted that wildlife cases are increasing in the state and they have to be dealt with a stern hand and that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.6. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and havingheard the learned public prosecutor, despite the vehement submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not committed any offence under the wild life protection act, i am of the opinion that this is a matter that requires a thorough investigation and the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.in the result, the bail application stands dismissed. however, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer in or no.1 of 2021 of pathanapuram forest range office on or before 31.03.2022, his arrest shall be recorded and he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the same day and if any bail application is filed by the petitioner, the jurisdictional magistrate ..4.. shall consider the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.sd/- gopinath p. judge bka/28.03.2022

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 937 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: BINU AGED 36 YEARS BINDU BHAVANAM, CHEMBANARUVI, PIRAVANTHOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT -689696 KOLLAM, PIN - 689696 BY ADVS. S.SREEJITH Subhash Syriac RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI. T.R. RANJITH (SR.PP) THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is the 3rd accused in OR No. 1 of 2021 of

Pathanapuram Excise Range Office, Kollam District, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 2(1), 2(16), 2(20), 2(35), 2(36), 9, 39, 50 & 51 of the Kerala Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along

with the 4th accused in the case fixed a snare made of iron, on which, a wild boar tripped on the same and allegedly fell into a well. It is alleged that the petitioner along with the other accused, thereafter, killed the boar and consumed its meat.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the actual

allegation is that the petitioner along with the other accused in the case had consumed the meat of a boar, which had died on account of its fall into a well. It is submitted that the petitioner and the other accused had not killed any wild animal and therefore, the allegations against the petitioner are baseless. ..3..

5. The learned Public Prosecutor points out that the allegation is

celarly that the wild boar had fallen into the well after tripping over a snare illegally fixed by accused 3 and 4 and that as already noted, the petitioner is the 3rd accused in the case. It is submitted that wildlife cases are increasing in the State and they have to be dealt with a stern hand and that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having

heard the learned Public Prosecutor, despite the vehement submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not committed any offence under the Wild Life Protection Act, I am of the opinion that this is a matter that requires a thorough investigation and the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

In the result, the bail application stands dismissed. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer in OR No.1 of 2021 of Pathanapuram Forest Range Office on or before 31.03.2022, his arrest shall be recorded and he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the same day and if any bail application is filed by the petitioner, the jurisdictional magistrate ..4.. shall consider the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE bka/28.03.2022

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2022 Same Parties BINU vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.