1 2025:CGHC:46222 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1389 of 2025 Raja Janak S/o Mahendra Singh Aged About 26 Years R/o Torfa, Tahsil- Raghunathnagar, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer Of Forest Area Wadrafnagar, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 10/09/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suruksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Forest Crime No.19029/2023, registered at Police Station/Forest Area Wadrafnagar, District : Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 39, 50, 51, 52 of Wild Life Protection Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 27.12.2024, accused Raja Janak went with accused Mohan Singh to Parshuram Chowk, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Wadrafnagar, where three persons were present in a car near the Tehsil office. Accused Raja Janak went towards the west of the Court, where he brought a sack containing two elephant tusks and placed it in the car. At that time, the State-level Flying Squad Team, Raipur, apprehended accused Dildar Singh, Mohan Singh, and Laxman Singh near the Tehsil office, Wadrafnagar, along with the two elephant tusks, while the remaining accused managed to escape from the spot. Thereafter, the tusks were seized, and an offence was registered against the accused persons under Sections 9, 50, 51, and 52 of the Wildlife Protection Act, and investigation was taken up. During the investigation, statements of other accused persons and witnesses were recorded, and the accused were arrested. Since the applicant/accused Raja Janak was absconding, a charge-sheet was filed against the other co-accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged involvement of the crime. In the present case, there are total six accused persons out of which three accused persons have been granted bail by the learned trial Court and two accused persons have granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.04.2025 passed in MCRC/2587/2025. He further submits that there is no recovery made of elephant tusks from the possession of the present applicant, the same was recovered from the co-accused Dildar Singh and Mohan Singh and Laxman Singh and they have already been granted bail by the learned trial Court. He further submits that the present applicant has been made accused only on the basis of 3 memorandum statement of the co-accused and he has no previous criminal antecedent and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, may kindly be grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant is absconding since long time and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court against the applicant as an absconder, therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute and the material available in the case diary and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant as an absconder and that there is every likelihood that if he released on anticipatory bail, he would abscond and thereby hamper the trial, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to release the applicant on anticipatory bail 7. The Supreme Court, in Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in {(2012) 8 SCC 730} and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma, reported in {(2014) 2 SCC 171}, has observed that where the accused has been declared as an absconder and has not 4 cooperated with the investigation, he should not be granted anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Raja Janak, filed under Section 482 of BNSS, involved in Forest Crime No.19029/2023, registered at Police Station/Forest Area Wadrafnagar, District : Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 39, 50, 51, 52 of Wild Life Protection Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal