GAHC010060992025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : AB/658/2025

AKSHAY MANDAL

S/O-PARAN MANDAL SAHA,R/O- VILL-NO.2 DAILONG JHAR,P.O-BHOTA

GAON,P.S BIJNI,DIST-CHIRANG,ASSAM,PIN-783390

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R K SARMA, MR J DAS,MR T CHAKRABORTY,MR. D

CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, SPL PP,FOREST ASSAM

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

03.11.2025

1. Heard Mr. T Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner, Akshay Mandal, who has filed this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail, as he is apprehending arrest in connection with a case vide OR No. KR/06/2024 under Sections 9/39/49B of the Wildlife (Protection) Act,

1972 (the Act of 1972 for short) as amended up to date.

2. Heard Mr. I Borthakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. D Gogoi, learned Special Public Prosecutor, Wildlife.

3. It is submitted that the prime accused, Basudev Ray has already been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijni vide order dated 18.01.2025 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 37/2024, but the petitioner’s prayer for pre-arrest bail was rejected vide order dated 18.01.2025 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 36/2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijni.

4. The gist of the case is that on 07.12.2024, on a tip off, a joint raid was conducted by police and the forest staff in the house of Basudev Ray and some materials of wild cat species were seized and sent for expert opinion. As per the seizure list, a packet covered by plastic net containing wild life contraband of big wild cat species and others weighing about 4.865 kgs. was recovered.

5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is apprehending arrest as he has been named as an accused on the statement of the co-accused, Basudev Ray, who revealed that the body parts of the wild cat were kept in his house by the present petitioner, i.e., Akshay Mandal.

6. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that a person cannot be held liable on the basis of the statement of a co-accused. There was an acrimonious relationship prevailing between the petitioner and the co-accused, Basudev Ray, who has implicated the petitioner as being complicit in connection with this case.

7. The petitioner's earlier prayer for bail was rejected vide order of this Court dated 12.02.2025, in connection with A.B. No. 134/2025. The petitioner has approached this Court on change of circumstances. The petitioner has prayed for bail as he is suffering from severe backache. Annexure-6 of the petition are the medical certificates.

8. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

9. Learned standing counsel has raised objection against the bail petition as the offence is of serious nature.

10. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has co-operated with the investigation and he has appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement has been recorded. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer in compliance of the condition imposed upon him to appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight.

11. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has been suffering from severe backache. It can be presumed that investigation has also progressed substantially.

12. Considering all aspects, the interim order dated 22.04.2025, is hereby made absolute under the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate with the remaining part of investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and the petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged.

13. On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order granted to the petitioner shall stand automatically cancelled.

14. This application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant Order downloaded on 15-01-