Mangal Rathiya And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3249 of 2016

1. Mangal Rathiya & Anr. S/O Manoranjan Rathiya Aged About 55 Years R/O Village - Mohanpur, P.S. Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh

2. Chaitan Rathiya S/O Baiga Rathiya Aged About 50 Years R/O Village - Mohanpur, P.S. Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh Civil & Revenue Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Forest Ranger, Forest Range - Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicants :

Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mrs. Shobha Kashyap, Dy.G.A.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 04.07.2016 1.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested on 03-05-2016 in connection with Crime No. P.O.R. No. 6748/19, registered at Police Station : Forest Ranger, Lailunga, District Raigarh (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 51(1)(2) of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 and Section 2 (16) and 9 of the Wild (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002. 2.

As per prosecution case, on 2-5-2016 present applicants along with other co-accused persons followed one deer in forest with their dogs and the deer was chased by the dogs and subsequently when it was exhausted the applicants along with other co-accused persons attacked the deer and killed it and thereby the aforesaid offence committed.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case and in-fact hunting was made by the dogs, not by the applicants. They only went to forest to watch the scene of crime. He would further submit that the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicants are in jail since 3-5-2016 and no further investigation is necessary, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.

4.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the case diary, documents and the statements of the prosecutrix

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, nature of allegation leveled against the applicants and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 3-5-2016 , I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for their appearance as and when directed.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju