Allahabad High Court
Kirparam @ Kripa And 14 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 8 October, 2025
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:61755
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1120 of 2025
Kirparam @ Kripa And 14 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Anjani Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Range Case No.04/2012-13 under sections 9, 27, 35(6), 51(1) of Wild Life Protection Act, P.S. Gaurifanta, district Lakhimpur Kheri.
2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants belong to Tharu Scheduled Tribe. The respondents 2 and 3 have filed a complaint on the basis of H2 report dated 14.5.2012, i.e. case No.3756/12 against 66 persons including the applicants on the basis of frivolous facts alleging that on 14.5.2012 at 9.00 a.m. the forest Guard Tej Pratap Singh while he was patrolling, saw that the accused persons including the applicants had cut several trees of Saal, Jamun etc. They came on 45 dunlops. It is submitted that the offence is triable by Magistrate. It is a case of false implication. There is no recovery made in this case by the prosecution which makes the prosecution story highly improbable. The maximum punishment under the offence is upto three years.
Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that the applicants shall cooperate in the trial.
4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel.
5.Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, the applicants 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 have explained criminal history, rest of the applicants have no criminal history, the fact that there is no recovery made in this case by the prosecution nor there is any independent witness of the incident, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicants that they shall cooperate in the trial, judgment of Supreme Court in Musheer Alam versus The State of U.P. and another 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant.
6. In view of the above, it is provided that the applicants Kirparam alias Kripa, Madhovar, Bhichchho Kumari alias Michchho Kumari, Matthi alias Mandi Lal, Rajesh Kumar, Santram, Karamlal, Kathel alias Kathelram, Lalmati, Dasuram, Sarju Prasad alias Sarju Ram, Mandal, Rajesh Kumar, Fakira and Ram Naresh, shall surrender before the concerned court within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. On such surrender, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
The applicants shall cooperate in the trial and they will not influence the witnesses.The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed.
7. In case of default, it would be open for the trial court to proceed in accordance with law.
8. The application is allowed accordingly.
(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)
October 8, 2025
kkb/
