Advocates:
['SUNIL SAHU', '', 'SUMIT SHRIVASTAVA', 'A G']

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Reserved on 20-01-2022

Pronounced on 27-01-2022

MCRC No. 9029 of 2021

1. Ganesh Ram S/o Shri Pingal Ram Manjhi Aged About 26 Years R/o

Village- Bangla Pali, Van Parikshetra Arjuni, P.S. And Tahsil - Kasdol,

Police Outpost- Sonakhan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

2. Dabel S/o Late Shri Mangluram Manjhi Aged About 66 Years R/o

Village- Bangla Pali, Van Parikshetra Arjuni, P.S. And Tahsil- Kasdol,

Police Outpost- Sonakhan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

3. Fulsingh S/o Shri Mahadev Manjhi Aged About 20 Years R/o Village

Bangla Pali, Van Parikshetra Arjuni, P.S. And Tahsil - Kasdol, Police

Outpost- Sonakhan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

4. Kamlesh S/o Shri Chandel Manjhi Aged About 34 Years R/o Village-

Bangla Pali, Van Parikshetra Arjuni, P.S. And Tahsil- Kasdol, Police

Outpost- Sonakhan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

---- Applicants

Versus

•

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Forest Officer, Forest Circle

Arjuni, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

---- Non-applicant

For Applicants

: Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate

For State

: Shri Animesh Tiwari, Deputy Advocate General

Hon'ble Shri Justice

Narendra Kumar Vyas

C.A.V.

ORDER

1. The applicants have filed this first bail application under Section 439

of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as they have been arrested in

connection with crime No. 15571/13 registered at Forest Officer,

Forest Circle Arjuni, Distt – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the

offence punishable under Sections 9, 39, 50, 51 and 52 of the Wild

Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the officers of the Forest

Department Arjuni Circle received information on 26.10.2021 that

applicants have haunted a female Sambar. On such information

being received the Forest Officers prepared a team, conducted

search and found that applicants were in possession of meat, they

2

seized the meat and recorded their statements in which they stated

that the dogs were caught hold of the Sambar so forest officer

arrested them for alleged commission of offence.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have

been falsely implicated in the present case and they are innocent.

He would further submit that the animal which has been alleged to

have been killed by the applicants falls within Schedule-I of the Wild

Life (Protection) Act. The Seizure Panchanama as well as recovery of

the wild animal is from the spot, not from the possession of the

applicants. The female Sambar was killed by dogs, they have not

haunted the animal. He would further submit that the final report has

not been submitted, the offence is triable by the Judicial Magistrate

First Class, punishment may extend to three years and trial may take

some time and the applicants are in custody since 26.10.2021. The

applicants are ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all the

directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court,

therefore, they may be released on bail. In support of his arguments,

learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the judgment of

coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Arjun Singh and Others

vs. State of C.G.¹

4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposes the bail

application and would submit that the applicants have haunted

animal which falls within Schedule III item No. 16 of the Wild Life

(Protection) Act and cut its carcass as reflected from the Panchnama.

He would further submit that the place where the offence has been

committed by the applicants falls within compartment No. 356 to 360

which has been declared Reserve Forest on 07.12.1878.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. For ready reference Schedule-III of the Wild Life (Protection) Act,

1972 is reproduced below :-

“SCHEDULE III

[See secs. 2, 8, 1 *** 9, 11, and 61]

2[***]

[1.***]

2. Barking deer or muntjac (Munt