Petitioner apprehends arrest in Crime No.154 of 2014 of the Kuttampuzha Police station registered for the offence punishable under Secs.25(1) (a) of the Arms Act and seeks pre arrest bail. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that on the relevant day and time, the petitioner was seen passing through the reserve forest with a country gun. On seeing the forest officials, he ran away leaving the country gun and gun powder. The forest officials seized and handed over the same to the Police who registered the case. It is submitted that O.R. No.2 of 2014 is registered against the petitioner at the Pooyamkutty forest station for alleged trespass into the reserve forest.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. It is submitted that Vasu, a forest guard had misbehaved with wife of the petitioner on 17.12.2013. The petitioner preferred a complaint to Bail Appl. No.3802 of 2014 2 the Vanitha cell since no action was taken by the Range Officer. The said Vasu wanted the petitioner to settle the matter but the petitioner did not oblige. Hence the petitioner is falsely implicated. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence on the relevant day and time.
4. Having regard to the nature of allegations made against the petitioner which require thorough investigation, I am satisfied that pre arrest bail cannot be allowed.
5. The application is dismissed.
It is directed that in case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate as early as possible.
Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge