Court allowed bail application in a case under sections of India Forest Act, finding it to be a fit case based on Data Ram judgment without expressing opinion on merits.
Applicant released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each with specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3561 of 2021
Applicant :- Sodhar @ Manoj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Awadh Maurya,Kamalesh Kumar Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Sodhar @ Manoj in connection with Range Case No.117 of 2020-21, under Sections 26, 63, 77, 41, 42 India Forest Act, Range Farenda, Police Station Purandarpur, district Maharajganj.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant Forest Guard against eleven named accused person including the applicant. It was alleged that on 09.11.2020 at 4.00 p.m. ten persons were allegedly loading the illegal Sakhu wood in pick-up vehicle.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the alleged recovery shown from the applicant is fake and false as there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.11.2020, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 , but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Sodhar @ Manoj involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 2.2.2021
R./
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving Sections 26, 63, 77, 41, 42 of the India Forest Act.
Whether the offence is triable by a Court of Session or a Magistrate's Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and othersFollowed¶10
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 1 enactments
Sodhar @ Manoj
State of U.P.
Another
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
