Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35448 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5169 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Distt. Forest Officer Bahraich Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumari Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Range Case No.01 of 2025-26, under Sections 09/51 (1), 39/51 (1), 48A/51 (1), 49B, 51 (1) of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, Range Murtiha, District Bahraich. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present complaint case and he also submitted that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate and punishable upto seven years. She lastly submits that the applicant has no criminal history and is ready to co-operate in the investigation. The applicant is in jail since 29.04.2025 and therefore be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant for bail and submitted that the body of the peacock was found inside the campus of the applicant but she does not disputes the fact that the alleged offence is triable by Magistrate and is punishable upto seven years. 5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the complaint case, other relevant documents, and the fact that the offence alleged is triable before the Magistrate and is punishable upto seven years, I find it as a fit case for bail of the applicant and I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 6. Let applicant - Ram Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid Range Case, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. . (Rajeev Singh, J.) Order Date :- 11.6.2025 Arnima Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench