High CourtsSingle Bench

M. Appachan vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 5 January 2011 · Citation: (2011) 01 KAR CK 0161

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Jagannathan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 — Section 86, 87 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 379
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal P. No. 5031 of 2010
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 406 words

V. Jagannathan, J.—Heard both sides in respect of the anticipatory bail petition filed.

2.

Petitioner''s counsel submits that a case has been registered in Cr. No. 146/10 for the offence punishable u/s 379 of IPC r/w Sections 86 and 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act in connection with cutting of sandal wood trees in the estate of one Karthamada Suhramani and the forest officers went to the spot after getting information from the police officials, caught hold of one accused and another person ran away. The incident happened on. 24.8.10.

3.

Submitting that, the accused who was caught by the forest officers was said to be aged about 29 years, it is unlikely that the police officers would have tailed to caught hold of the Petitioner who was much older and was aged around 56 years and apart; from this, the Petitioner is not involved in the alleged offences and a false case has been registered against him. Submitting that the Petitioner will co-operate with the police officers and would also offer solvent surety apart from appearing before the court, learned Counsel sought for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.

Submission of the learned Government Pleader for the State is that, the Petitioner is also one of the accused persons involved in the aforementioned offences and therefore anticipatory bail be rejected.

5.

Having thus heard both sides, in view of the submission put forward by the Petitioner''s counsel and as the Petitioner is also willing to cooperate with the police and ready to furnish solvent surety and taking note of the fact that the Petitioner is a resident of Virajpet, Kodagu, I am of the view that the Petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail by imposing conditions to safeguard the interest of the Respondent State.

6.

In the result, the petition is allowed on the following conditions:

1.

In the event of the arrest of Petitioner by the concerned police in connection with Cr. No. 512/09, he shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs. 50.000/- with two sureties for the likesum, out of whom, one shall be a solvent surety, to the satisfaction of the arresting police officer.

2.

He shall assist the police in the investigation and shall co-operate with them.

3.

He shall appear before the jurisdictional police station on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m.

4.

He shall not involve himself in like offences, in future.