1 2025:CGHC:14613 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2354 of 2025 Anandram Rathiya S/o Kiritram Rathiya Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Krondha, Police Station Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Forest Divisional OfÏcer, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26.03.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. P.O.R. No. 14138/10 registered at Police Station – Forest Divisional OfÏcer, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) offence under Sections 2, 9, 39, 51, and 52 of the Wildlife Protection Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s story, on the date of the incident, the respondent authorities were tracking a group of 13 elephants that had come from Chhal Forest Division, Khadgaon. A male elephant RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 was found dead in the field of the present applicant, and upon investigation, it was determined that the elephant had died due to electrocution. The respondent authorities discovered a shock panel charger, a battery, and a naked electric wire passing through the applicant’s field. A Panchnama was prepared, and the applicant was charged under Sections 2, 9, 39, 51, and 52 of the Wildlife Protection Act and was subsequently arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has been arrested only on the basis of suspicion and he has neither committed nor participated in any such act, which may amount to any of the offences, mentioned above. He further submits that the applicant has purchased the 12 KV solar shocking machine and has fenced his field by shocking machine for purpose of preventing the cattle from entering his field and to save his crops, and only 12 KV current was flowing in that wires, which is not sufÏcient to cause death of any cattle or any human being. It only gives a blow to the trace passer, but does not cause any injury or death. He further submits that the present applicant is farmer and sole bread earner of his family and he has no any previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 22.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits 3 that the death of the elephant was caused by electrocution due to the presence of a shock panel charger, battery, and naked electric wire found in the applicant’s field. The materials collected during the investigation, including the Panchnama, clearly establish the involvement of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant is a farmer and he has purchased the 12 KV solar shocking machine and has fenced his field by shocking machine for purpose of preventing the cattle from entering his field and to save his crops, he was never intended to cause death or any harm to any cattle, he was only intended to save his crops and further the charge-sheet has been submitted in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 22.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Anandram Rathiya, involved in Crime No. P.O.R. No. 14138/10 registered at Police Station – Forest Divisional OfÏcer, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) offence under Sections 2, 9, 39, 51, and 52 of the Wildlife Protection Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect 4 that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (ii) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the 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 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against his in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan