1 2025:CGHC:24696 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4492 of 2025 1 - Suresh Ravi S/o Ramkumar Ravi, Aged About 38 Years, 2 - Motilal Ravi, S/o Rampati Ravi, Aged About 42 Years, Both R/o Salwahi, Out-Post- Dindo, P.S. - Trikunda, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Forest Range Officer, Forest Range Dhamni (Krishnanagar) District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Hariom Rai, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.21991/06 registered at Police Station Forest Range Dhamni (Krishnanagar) District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G for the offence punishable under Sections 9, 50, 51, 52, 39, 44, 39 (A), 39 (3), 40, 42 of Wild Life Protection Act 1972. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.06.17 18:32:43 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, Forest Range Dhamni (Krishnanagar), conducted an investigation regarding illegal haunting of Bluebuck and during enquiry offence has been registered u/s- 9, 50, 51, 52, 39,44, 39 (A), 39 (3), 40, 42 of Wild Life Protection Act, and after that the applicants/accused have been arrested on 13.04.2025 and since they are in jail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case. He would submit that on the date of incident applicants went to pick mahua flowers and during that the forest officers on the basis of suspicion arrested the applicants on the allegation of illegal haunting of Bluebuck and further nothing has been seized from the applicants which shows the involvement in commission of crime. He would submit that co- accused person namely Ramlakhan Tekam has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4455 of 2025 on 13/06/2025. He would submit that there is no previous criminal antecedent of applicant no. 1 & against applicant no. 2, one criminal antecedent for the offence under section 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 342, 323, 427, 294, 506, 392 of I.P.C is registered as Crime No.14/2020, P.S- Trikunda is pending before the court below for framing of charges, in which applicant no. 2 is enlarged on anticipatory bail. He would submit that the applicants are in jail since 13/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 3 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, nature and gravity of offence, considering the fact that co-accused person namely Ramlakhan Tekam has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4455 of 2025 on 13/06/2025, also considering the fact there is no previous criminal antecedent of applicant no. 1 & against applicant no. 2, there is one criminal antecedent for the offence under section 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 342, 323, 427, 294, 506, 392 of I.P.C registered as Crime No.14/2020, P.S- Trikunda in which applicant no. 2 is enlarged on anticipatory bail, considering the period of detention of the applicants since 13/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and trial is likely to some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant No.1 Suresh Ravi and applicant No.2 Motilal Ravi, involved in Crime No.21991/06 registered at Police Station Forest Range Dhamni (Krishnanagar) District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G for the offence punishable under Sections 9, 50, 51, 52, 39, 44, 39 (A), 39 (3), 40, 42 of Wild Life Protection Act 1972, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 4 liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri