The High Court of Chhattisgarh discharged Regular Bail for three applicants accused of electrocuting an elephant under the Wild Life (Protection) Act. Considering their detention period and substantial investigation, the court allowed bail against a personal bond.
Release of applicants on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 4020 of 2015
---- Applicants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Forest Ranger, Forest RangeLailunga, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Non-applicant
For Applicants: Shri M.K. Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State: Shri Anupam Dubey, Deputy Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order On Board
17/08/2015
Heard.
(1) The accused/applicants have moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. POR No.6615/2008 registered at Police Station – Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh for the offences punishable under Sections 9, 51, 1, 2 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (henceforth 'the Act')
(2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that applicant & other coaccused persons are said to have electrocuted the schedule animal namely elephant and, thereby, committed the aforesaid offences.
2
(3) Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that applicants have been falsely implicated in the offence in question as they have not committed any offence; and the offence has been committed by Leeladhar, who is still absconding and, as such, the applicants are in detention since 02.07.2015 and the punishment prescribed for the said offence is three years under the Act and, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.
(4) On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
(5) Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case; considering the role of the present applicants in the offence in question; and their pre-trial detention; substantial investigation has already been made; this court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
(6) Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge
D/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail during trial for alleged offences under the Wild Life (Protection) Act.
Whether substantial investigation has been made justifying the release of the accused on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jogiram S/o Shri Ghasiram Aghariya
Kansal S/o Jogiram Aghariya
Dhobi Kumar S/o Shri Borriram
Sanjay K. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
