1 2026:CGHC:6789 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 122 of 2026 1. Sukhram S/o Fagnu Baiga, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Nagadabra, Police Station Kukdur, Tahsil Pandriya, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) 2. Birsu Ram S/o Fagnu Baiga, Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Nagadabra, Police Station Kukdur, Tahsil Pandriya, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) --- Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Forest Range Officer At Forest Range, Pandariya District- Kabirdham (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 254 of 2026 Manglu Baiga S/o Lamu Baiga Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Nagadabra, Police Station- Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Forest Range Officer At Forest Range, Pandariya, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.02.2026 1. Since the above-mentioned two bail applications arise out of same crime PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.06 18:19:20 +0530 2 number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No./ P.O.R. Forest Case No. 20040/2023 registered at Police Station- Forest Ranger Officer at Forest Range, Pandariya, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 33(1)(b), 33(1)(c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Section 9 read with Section 2(1), 2(16)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Section 3 of Damage to Public Property Prevention Act, 1984(in MCRC No. 122/2026) and Sections 331(1)(a), 33(1)(b), 33(1)(c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Section 9 read with Section 2(1), 2(16)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Section 3 of Damage to Public Property Prevention Act, 1984(in MCRC No. 254/2026). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicants illegally encroached and ploughing in the protected forest area of the Kodwa Beat, Forest Range, Pandariya, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) and the act of the applicants may have caused significant hardship to wild life, animals, birds and also cutting green trees and plants. On this basis the crime has been registered against the applicants and arrested the applicants, hence, this bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicants have not roped any crops, never used the land of compartment No.519, which clearly shows that the applicants are falsely implicated in this crime with mala-fide intention on account of enmity between two communities 3 members of the village. He further submits that the applicants are in jail since 31.10.2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that the applicants have three previous criminal antecedents and the case has been disposed off by paid the fine amount and the applicant namely, Manglu Baiga has one previous criminal antecedents, the case has been disposed off by paid the fine amount. Hence, he prays for grant of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, allegations levelled against the applicants and the fact that that the applicants are in jail since 31.10.2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that the applicants, namely, Sukhram and Birsu Ram have three previous criminal antecedents and the case has been disposed off by paid the fine amount and the applicant namely, Manglu Baiga has one previous criminal antecedents, the case has been disposed off by paid the fine amount, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 - Sukhram and Birsu Ram (MCRC No. 122 of 2026) and Manglu Baiga (MCRC No.254/2026) involved in Crime No./P.O.R Forest Case No. 20040/2023 registered at Police Station- Forest Ranger Officer at Forest Range, Pandariya, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 33(1)(b), 33(1)(c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Section 9 read with Section 2(1), 2(16)(c) of the Wild Life 4 (Protection) Act, 1972 and Section 3 of Damage to Public Property Prevention Act, 1984(in MCRC No. 122/2026) and Sections 331(1)(a), 33(1)(b), 33(1)(c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Section 9 read with Section 2(1), 2(16)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Section 3 of Damage to Public Property Prevention Act, 1984 (in MCRC No. 254/2026), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each 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 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants 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 applicants shall remain present, in person, before the 5 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 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti