The appellant was charged with hunting of specially protected game and arrested. They applied for bail and the magistrate declined the application until the investigations were finalised. The court mero motu raised the issue whether the matter was appealable given the apparent hybrid nature of the order given. The Court held that the learned magistrate had to consider the facts upon which the investigating officer relied to conclude that there is a possibility that the appellant may interfere with the police investigation. The investigation officer gave no such evidence. The learned magistrate, in the absence thereof, found that his involvement was support for a conclusion that there is a possibility that the appellant would interfere with the police investigation. This was a wrong application of the learned magistrate’s discretion and her decision to refuse the appellant’s release on this ground was wrong. Thus the appellant was granted bail.