The court emphasized that the seriousness of the allegations and the necessity for custodial interrogation outweigh claims of innocence or health issues in bail applications.

ORDER

This is the second application filed under Section 482 of the Bharathiya Nagarik Suraksha Samhita, for an order of pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner is the second accused in O.R.No.4 of 2023 of the Forest Range Office, Varayal, Wayanad, which is registered against five accused persons, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 9 , 39, 50, 51 read with Section 2 (16) , 2(20), 2(31b), 2(35) & 2(36) of Wild Life Protection Act , 1972.

3. The crux of the prosecution allegation is that: in the intervening night of 22.11.2023 and 23.11.202,3 the accused hunted a deer, removed its antlers and thereafter, caused a deep wound on its neck and killed it. The accused, thereafter, transported the carcass in a car bearing No.KL-72-D-3880, through Thalassery-Baveli road. When the vehicle reached Periya 34 (Alar Junction), the Forest officials, on getting a secret information, attempted to intercept the vehicle. But, the accused had refused to stop the vehicle. Instead, they dashed the vehicle against the Forest officials and caused injuries to two of them, and also damaged their vehicle causing a loss of Rs.10,000/- to the Forest Department. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

4.Heard; Sri. Krishna Prasad.S, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. There is a change of circumstances subsequent to the passing of Annexure A2 order because accused 3 and 4 have been arrested and enlarged on bail. Likewise, this Court has granted the sixth accused an order of pre-arrest bail. The petitioner is a senior citizen and he is suffering from serious ailments. There is no circumstances to prove the petitioner's culpability in the crime. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the investigation. The petitioner's custodial interrogation is not necessary and no recovery is to be effected. Hence, the application may be allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The Investigating Officer has filed a detailed bail objection report stoutly opposing the application. The Investigating Officer has stated that the petitioner has been absconding for the last 10 months defying the legal system. There are incriminating materials to substantiate that the petitioner and his son have committed the above offences. There is no change of circumstances subsequent to the passing of Annexure A2 order. The petitioner's custodial interrogation is necessary and recovery is to be effected. Therefore, the application may be dismissed.

6. By Annexure A2 order dated 27.3.2024, after considering the earlier application, this Court came to a conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled to an order of pre- arrest bail. The change of circumstances now projected in the present application is that accused 3 and 4 have been arrested and enlarged on bail and the sixth accused has been granted an order of pre-arrest bail. Since the petitioner is suffering from heart desease, the petitioner may be granted an order of pre-arrest bail.

7. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, particularly, the reasons rendered by this Court in Annnexure A2 order, the prima facie materials that substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime, the nature, seriousness and gravity of the accusations attributed against the petitioner, that the petitioner's custodial interrogation is necessary and recovery is to be effected, I am not satisfied that the petitioner has made out any valid ground to establish the change of circumstances for filing the said application. The application is meritless and it is only to be dismissed. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.