Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010246842024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3060/2024 KESHAR BAHADUR CHETRY S/O LAKSHMAN CHETRY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARBHAGIA, PO BORSOLA, PS DHEKIAJULI, DIST SONITPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE SPECIAL PP, WILDLIFE ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R BARUAH, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 23.01.2025 Heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent, Wildlife. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with offence report No. DH/11/2024- 2025, dated 07.11.2024, under Sections 9/51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, is preferred by applicant, Page No.# 2/3 namely, Keshar Bahadur Chetry, for grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of complaint dated 07.11.2024 lodged by Range Forest Officer, Dhekiajuli Range. The essence of allegation against the applicant is that on 07.11.2024, at about 6:30 a.m., a carcass of an elephant was detected in the paddy field belonging to the present applicant and it was also detected that the paddy field was surrounded by electric fencing. 4. Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had been granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail, vide order dated 29.11.2024, and pursuant to the said order, he has appeared before the I.O. and his statement has also been recorded, and that he has been cooperating with the investigating agency, and therefore, a contention is being made that the interim order dated 29.11.2024, may be made absolute in the same terms and conditions. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Sarma, the learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that investigation of the case has already been completed and final report has been submitted before the learned trial Court. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have gone through the application and the documents placed on record. 7. It appears that this Court, vide order dated 29.11.2024, was pleased to granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the applicant and indisputably, he has also appeared before the I.O. and his statement has also been recorded. Further, it appears from the submission of Mr. Sarma, learned Special Public Prosecutor that investigation has already been completed and final report is also submitted before the learned trial Court. Page No.# 3/3 8. In that view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the applicant seems not to be warranted in the interest of investigation and accordingly, the interim order dated 29.11.2024, is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. 9. In terms of above, this application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant