Iyappan vs Forest Range Officer, Forest Range Office Aranthangi — 341/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 480. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 11th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNPD090007252026
Filing Number
720/2026
Filing Date
05-Mar-2026
Registration No
341/2026
Registration Date
05-Mar-2026
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Aranthangi
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 04-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Iyappan
Adv. M.Rajendran
Respondent(s)
-
1.Forest Range Officer, Forest Range Office Aranthangi
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court at Aranthangi granted bail to the accused (Ayyappan) in a Wildlife Protection Act case involving alleged killing of a calf. The court considered that the accused had no prior criminal record, family dependence, and reliable sureties, and applied the principle that "bail is the rule, jail is the exception." Bail was granted with conditions including a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties, daily reporting to the forest office for 30 days, and prohibitions against witness intimidation and foreign travel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate
-
07-Mar-2026
Issue of Service
Judicial Magistrate
-
05-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 341/2026
Summary The Judicial Magistrate Court at Aranthangi granted bail to the accused (Ayyappan) in a Wildlife Protection Act case involving alleged killing of a calf. The court considered that the accused had no prior criminal record, family dependence, and reliable sureties, and applied the principle that "bail is the rule, jail is the exception." Bail was granted with conditions including a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties, daily reporting to the forest office for 30 days, and prohibitions against witness intimidation and foreign travel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts