Bajin vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 and 3 in Crime No.1035/2023 of the Guruvayur Police Station registered against the accused (three in number) alleging them to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 39(b), 9, and 51 of the Wile Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The petitioners were arrested on 2.12.2023.

The gist of the prosecution allegation is that: at about 8.50 a.m., on 2.12.2023, when the Sub Inspector of Police, Guruvayur Police Station inspected the vehicle bearing registration No. KL 17 E 5450 at the road in front of a Shopping Complex at Guruvayur, he found the accused 1 to 3, the passengers of the vehicle in possession of 5 Kg of Ambergris. The possession of the said article is prohibited under the provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.P.K.Subash, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusation levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. The second accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court as per the order dated 26.12.2023 in B.A. No.11042/2023 (Annexure A4). The investigation in the case is practically complete. The petitioners further detention is unnecessary. The petitioners are willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the source of the contraband article has not been identified till date. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the second accused has already been enlarged on bail by Annexure A4 order of this Court and the investigation in the case is practically complete.

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, and after perusing Annexure A4 order passed by this Court on 26.12.2023, releasing the second accused on bail, on the specific observation that the investigation in the case has progressed and the further detention of the second accused is not necessary, and the petitioners are similarly placed to the second accused, I am of the definite view that the petitioners also entitled to the benefit of same order, particularly, since the petitioners have been in custody since 2.12.2023. Hence, the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail, but subject to stringent conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of one month or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;

(iv) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below.

(viii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].