Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.2574 of 2014 of the Muvattupuzha Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379 read with 34 IPC. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that on 30.08.2014 they have committed trespass into the property of the de facto complainant, without his knowledge, who is residing at Thrissur, cut and removed various valuable trees from the property having a value of 8 lakhs and committed theft of the timber.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The contents of the C.D. prima facie reveal the complicity of the petitioners. The investigation of the case is not over. It is true that a portion of the timber has been recovered. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and serious allegations against the petitioners, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted.
B.A.No.8163 of 2014 2
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for an opportunity to the petitioners to surrender before the investigating officer and to co-operate with the investigation.
In the result, this bail application is dismissed. At the same time, if so advised, the petitioners may surrender before the investigating officer within five days from today and in such case, the investigating officer can interrogate the petitioners, effect recovery if any, and conduct the investigation and produce the petitioners without delay before the concerned Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, where the petitioners can move for bail. In such case, the learned Magistrate shall pass appropriate orders, preferably on the same day itself, provided advance notice on such application has been given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor also.
B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE
sj9/12