Allowed

Vishwanath v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jul 2022MCRC/4693/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In four connected bail applications, the High Court of Chhattisgarh granted bail to applicants facing charges of illegal tree felling and forest damage under the Wild Life (Protection) Act and Indian Forest Act. The court held it was a fit case for release on personal bond with local surety.

What did the court decide?

The Court allowed the bail applications and directed the accused/applicants to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- each with a local surety of like amount.

Vishwanath Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Environment and Pollution | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 4681 of 2022

¶5

Dhanauram S/o Mahavir Yadav, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Mohanpour, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

¶6

Suresh S/o Mansingh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Mohanpour, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

¶7

Manharan Singh S/o Mohit Kshatriya (Wrongly Mentioned As Chhatriya In The Impugned Order Sheet), Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Mohanpour, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

¶8

----Applicants

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Forest Range OfÏcer, Forest Range, Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

¶11

---- Respondent

¶12

MCRC No. 4693 of 2022

¶13

Vishwanath S/o Mahavir Yadav, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Mohanpur, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh.

¶14

Johan S/o Devendra Singh Gond, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Mohanpur, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh.

¶15

Birbal S/o Khorbahra Gond, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Mohanpur, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh.

¶16

Pratap Singh S/o Mehtar Singh Gond, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Mohanpur, Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, Tahsil Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh.

¶17

---- Applicants

¶18

Versus

¶19

State of Chhattisgarh Through Forest Range OfÏcer, Forest Range Sahaspur Lohara, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶20

---- Respondent

¶21

MCRC No. 5507 of 2022

¶22

Brijlal Meravi S/o Sonsingh Aged About 37 Years Occupation - Labour, R/o Village - Mohanpur, Police Station - Singhanpuri Jungle, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶23

---- Applicant

¶24

Versus

¶25

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Forest Range OfÏcer, Forest

¶26

¶27

Range Sahaspur Lohara, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶28

---- Respondent

¶29

MCRC No. 5699 of 2022

¶30

Phool Singh S/o Guhri Yadav Aged About 45 Years, Occupation - Labour, R/o Village - Mohanpur, Police Station - Singhanpuri Jungle, District-Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

¶31

---- Applicant

¶32

Versus

¶33

State of Chhattisgarh Through - Forest Range OfÏcer, Forest Range Sahaspur Lohara, District-Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

¶34

---- Respondent

¶35

For Applicants : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Adv. For State : Ms. Binu Sharma, PL

¶36

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board

¶37

21.07.2022

¶38

The accused/applicants have moved these first bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Forest Crime (P.O.R.) No. 17189/06 (in MCRC Nos. 4681/2022 & 5699/2022) and Forest Crime (P.O.R.) No. 17189/05 (in MCRC Nos. 4693/2022 & 5507/2022) registered at Forest RangeSahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 2(15), 2(16c), 9 & 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Sections 30(1)(a), 33(1)(c) & 33(1)(f) of Indian Forest Act, 1927, Sections 2C, 7, 55 & 58 of Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and Section 3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984.

¶39

As per the case of prosecution, the allegation against the applicants is that they illegally cut down 458 trees of various species and also committed girdling of 258 trees of forest area, caused the loss of Rs. 1,20,12,943/- and endangered the lives of Wild-Life animals. It is further alleged that they damaged to public property by breaking the boundary mark. Their illegal exploitation and sale of medicinal plants has caused irreparable

¶40

¶41

damage to the environment of forest.

¶42

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the applicants belong to tribal community, residing in the forest zone village namely Mohanpur and they have some political rivalry with earlier Sarpanch of the village, therefore, due to political pressure, they have been roped in the crime in question. Applicants Phool Singh and Brijlal Meravi are in jail since 01.06.2022 and rest of applicants are in jail since 12.03.2022, they are poor villagers and there is no likelihood of the cases being decided in the near future, therefore, the applicants may be granted bail.

¶43

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

¶44

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary.

¶45

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of the applicants, as the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶46

Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each, with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicants are directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶49

V/-

Vishwanath v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwanath v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Chandra Shekhar Harit Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs R. S. Pandey

Sharad Kesharwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dattatry Maukhriwale Vs State of Madhyapradesh

Jay Singh Nag Vs the State of M.P.

Babu Lal and Another Vs State