Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 790 of 2025 Applicant :- Bihari And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Kumar Shrivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants apprehending their arrest in Range Case No. 13/2011-12, case no.-3271 of 2012 U/s 9, 27, 31, 35(6), 51(1), wild life protection act, Range Bankati, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. In the prosecution case, it is alleged while on routine patrolling on 30-01-2012, a Wildlife Guard, Tej Pratap Narayan Singh, saw the accused transporting logs of illegally felled Sal trees in Ambarghad forest. On noticing the forest team, the accused fled with tools, shouting that forest officials had arrived. Despite efforts to apprehend them, they escaped using the cover of the forest. Two felled Sal trees and related timber were found at the spot. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants were not apprehended from the spot. There are no independent witnesses supporting the prosecution’s version. It is further submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the absence of any credible evidence. The alleged recovery is claimed to be false and is shown to have been made from the applicants' possession. Applicant No. 1 has explained criminal antecedent of one case, while Applicant No. 2 has explained criminal antecedent of two cases in the bail application. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the anticipatory bail application. Upon due consideration of the facts that the incident is alleged to have occurred in the year 2012; the applicants have undertaken to cooperate with the trial; the criminal history has been duly explained; there is a lack of independent prosecution witnesses; and considering the age of the applicant 65 and 60 years respectively along with their assurance to cooperate in the proceedings, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants deserve to be granted anticipatory bail, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to their cooperation in the trial. In view of the above, the accused-applicants, Bihari and Nathe @ Natheram, are directed to surrender before the trial court within ten days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Upon their surrender, the trial court shall release them on anticipatory bail, subject to their furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court, with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall refrain from directly or indirectly inducing, threatening, or promising any person familiar with the facts of the case in a manner that may dissuade them from revealing such facts before the Court or result in tampering with the evidence; (ii) The applicants shall not travel outside India without prior permission from the Court; (iii) The applicants shall not attempt to influence or intimidate any prosecution witness; (iv) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on all scheduled dates unless specifically exempted from personal appearance; (v) In the event of any violation of the aforementioned conditions, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench