[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Jagdish vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12196
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2419 of 2026
1 - Jagdish S/o Shri Punitram Chouhan Aged About 38 Years R/o Village
Bilari (Ja), Thana Saliha, Tahsil Sonakhan, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh.
2 - Abhimanyu Bariha S/o Shri Ramlal Bariha Aged About 25 Years R/o
Village Bilari (Ja), Thana Saliha, Tahsil Sonakhan, Distt. Balodabazar
Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Name And Adds. As Per Chargesheet)
... Applicants
versus
The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Forest Range Officer, Forest
Range Arjuni, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-Applicant
For Applicants : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13.03.2026
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/POR No. 16428/15 registered at Police
Station - Forest Range Arjuni, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara,
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 9 r/w Section 2(16)
(a), 2(16)(b), 2(16)(c), 39, 50, 51 and 52 of Wildlife Protection Act.
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
2. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 25.10.2025,
information was received regarding the hunting of a female wild
bison and that certain body parts of the said animal were lying in the
forest area of Range Arjuni. It was further informed by the informant
that some persons residing in the nearby local area were involved in
the said hunting. Thereafter, a sniffer dog team was called from
Udanti Sitanadi Tiger Reserve, Gariyaband, for investigation.
During the course of investigation, one Krishna Kumar was
apprehended on suspicion and his memorandum statement was
recorded, wherein he allegedly named the present applicants along
with other persons. On the basis of the said memorandum
statement, the officers of the Forest Department arrested the
present applicants for the alleged commission of the said offences.
Hence, this bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that the names of the applicants are not mentioned in the
POR/FIR and they have been implicated only on the basis of
suspicion without any cogent or reliable evidence to show that they
were involved in the alleged hunting of the wild animal (Bison). It is
further submitted that the alleged incident is said to have taken
place on 25.10.2025 and during investigation the co-accused
persons namely Kaushal and Rajendra were called, who merely
named the present applicants in their statements and except such
statements of co-accused persons there is no material evidence
against the applicants. It is also submitted that the body parts of the
wildlife animal were allegedly seized from an open place in the
forest area and were buried by the officers of the Forest
Department, and only on the basis of the memorandum statement of
the co-accused the applicants have been implicated and sought to
be arrested. He further submits that no wildlife animal has been
hunted by the present applicants and even the sniffer dog did not
identify the applicants as hunters, however, due to previous ill-will
the co-accused persons have falsely named the applicants. It is
further submitted that the Forest Officers have not conducted a
proper investigation and have filed the charge-sheet against the co-
accused persons while showing the present applicants as
absconding, though the applicants are permanent residents of
Forest Village Bilari (Jha) and have not committed any such
offence. It is lastly submitted that similarly situated one of the co-
accused person, namely, Sammelal Yadav has already been
granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 in MCRC
No. 223/2026 and on the basis of the said order another co-
accused, namely, Dinesh Kodaku, has already been granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 02.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1081/2026.
He also submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents,
and they are in jail since 26.02.2026, the charge-sheet has been
filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion.
Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants on the ground
of parity.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has
been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact
that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this
Court and the case of the present applicants is identical to that of
the co-accused.
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, the fact that though there are
allegations that the applicants along with other co-accused persons
committed the said crime, but one of the co-accused person,
namely, Sammelal Yadav has already been granted bail by this
Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 in MCRC No. 223/2026 and on
the basis of the said order another co-accused, namely, Dinesh
Kodaku, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 02.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1081/2026, and the case of present
applicants is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the
applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet
has been filed in the present case, they are in jail since 26.02.2026
and trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, and hence, this
Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on
bail in this case on the ground of parity.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let
the Applicants - Jagdish and Abhimanyu Bariha, involved in
Crime/POR No. 16428/15 registered at Police Station - Forest
Range Arjuni, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 9 r/w Section 2(16)(a), 2(16)(b),
2(16)(c), 39, 50, 51 and 52 of Wildlife Protection Act, be released
on bail on furnishing 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 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 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 misuse the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure their presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued
and the applicants fail 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 are
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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rahul Dewangan
