Santhosh @Deepu vs State Of Kerala

Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is an accused in O.R.No.6/2021 of Paruthippally Forest Range, Thiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 2(1) & (16) (b), 9, 39, (1) (a) & (3) & 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act ( 'The Act' for short).

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the accused allegedly captured Indian Soft Shelled Turtle which is included in schedule I, Part II of the Wild Life (Protection Act) and the accused was found to be in possession of 4 of those turtles in violation of the aforesaid provisions. He was arrested on 08.03.2021 red-handed with the turtle in his possession and thus the crime was registered. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody. He had applied for bail before the jurisdictional Magistrate, but the same was dismissed by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 16.03.2021 in CMP No.280/2021, relying on the embargo under S.51A of the Act, as are no reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty and that he is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. The application is therefore opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Magistrate, however, lost sight of the fact that the application of Section 51A of the Wild Life Protection Act requires something more than merely the compliance of the twin conditions stated therein. The Section reads thus:

"S. 51A: Certain conditions to apply while granting bail.

When any person accused of, the commission of any offence relating to Schedule I or Part II of Schedule II or offences relating to hunting inside the boundaries of National Park or wild life sanctuary or altering the boundaries of such parks and sanctuaries, is arrested under the provisions of the Act, then notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 no such person who had been previously convicted of an offence under this Act shall be released on bail unless

(a) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity of opposing the release on bail; and

(b) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail." (emphasis supplied)

Apart from the aforesaid twin conditions, it is also required that the accused should have been convicted earlier for an offence under the Act. In the instant case, the prosecution has no case that he was convicted of an offence under the Act. Hence, the rigour under Section 51A does not apply. The applicant has been in custody since his apprehension. I find no reason for the further detention of the applicant.

Resultantly, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following conditions:-

(i) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

(ii) He shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses.

(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail.

In case of violation of any bail condition, the prosecution is at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.