K.T. Sankaran, J.

The question involved in this Writ Appeal is whether an offence under Section 27 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 is bailable or non-bailable.

2. The second respondent (the Forest Range Officer, Anchal Range) filed Occurrence Report No. 4 of 2012 before the jurisdictional Magistrate alleging that the appellant committed offence under Section 27(1)(d), (e)(iii) and (iv) of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961. The appellant apprehended arrest. He filed B.A. No.1458 of 2012 before this Court under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A learned single Judge disposed of B.A. No.1458 of 2012 as per the order dated 12.3.2012, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:

"3. Considering the nature of the offences, the adverse effect on the investigation and the possibility of the petitioner tampering the evidence, it is not in the interest of justice to grant anticipatory bail as sought for. He is at liberty to surrender before the concerned Magistrate. If he files an application for regular bail after previous notice to the APP, learned Magistrate to pass appropriate orders in the application without delay, preferably on the same day."

3. The appellant did not comply with the order in the Bail Application. He did not surrender before the Magistrate's Court and file a Bail Application. On the other hand, the appellant filed W.P.(C) No. 7192 of 2012 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:

"(a). Declare that the power of the Forest Officer to release any person accused of forest offence on bail provided under Section 64 of the Kerala Forest Act 1961 is available to the Police Officer arresting any person accused of or concerned to any forest offence under Section 63 of the Act and any Judicial Magistrate considering application for bail of any person accused of a forest offence.

(b). Declare that all the forest offences defined under Section 2(e) of the Kerala Forest Act 1961 are non-cognizable and bailable.

(c). Declare that the practice of treating all forest offences defined under Section 2(e) of the Kerala Forest Act 1961 as non bailable as unconstitutional.

(d). As consequential relief, issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent or the police officer concerned or the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court (Forest Offences), Punalur in O.R.No.4 of 2012 on the file of the 2nd respondent, to release the petitioner on bail if he appears or surrenders or is produced before any of them.

(e). Pass such other orders as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. The learned single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner has filed this Writ Appeal.

5. Dr.V.N.Sankarjee, the learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that an offence under Section 27 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 is bailable. The learned counsel submitted that Sections 63 and 64 are the only provisions in the Kerala Forest Act providing for the power of the Forest Officer to arrest. The power under Section 63 is akin to the power conferred on a Police Officer under section 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned counsel submitted that if the person who was arrested under Section 63(1) of the Kerala Forest Act was taken or sent to the nearest Police Station, the Officer in charge of such station shall thereupon act in accordance with law and that procedure is akin to sub-section (3) of section 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is submitted that there is no provision in the Kerala Forest Act indicating as to whether the offence under Section 27 is cognizable or not or whether it is bailable or not.

6. Sri. M.P. Madhavankutty, learned Special Government Pleader for Forests, submitted that Part II of the First Schedule of the Code of Criminal Procedure will apply in the case on hand and the only conclusion that could be arrived at is that the offence under Section 27 of the K