Pre-arrest bail is not granted as a matter of course; special circumstances must exist.

ORDER

This application is filed underSection 482of theBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(for short, BNSS ), seeking pre- arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.7 in O.R. No.01/2025 of Akampadam Forest Station, Malappuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 27 (1)(e)(iv) of theKerala Forest Act, 1961, Sections 2(16), 9, 29 and 39(1) of theWild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, andSection 3(1) r/w Section 25(B)(a) of theArms Act, 1959.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant, along with others, trespassed into the reserve forest, hunted a sambar deer, transported the venison for sale and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Sarath M.S., the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. The investigation so far conducted would reveal the involvement of the applicant in crime. Accused Nos. 2 and 6 confessed that the applicant provided funds to purchase firearm used in the hunting of the sambar deer and he received wild meat as a reward for financial support and maintained close ties with the remaining accused.

7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked.

The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

Sd/-