[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shri Ramniwas Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8086
1 MCRC-9915-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 9 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9915 of 2026
SHRI RAMNIWAS GURJAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ravi Dwivedi - Advocate for applicant.
Shri Manish Saxena- Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail.
2. The applicant has been arrested on 04.02.2026 in connection with
crime No.792/2025 registered by the Department of Forest Ghatigaon
District Gwalior (M.P.) for the alleged commission of offences under
Sections 26, 41 of Indian Forest Act, 1927, and Sections 27, 29, 50 and 51 of
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
3. As per prosecution case, in the intervening night of 15-16 May
2025, in Compartment No. 418 of the Reserved Forest under Beat Jakhodi,
within the Son Chidiya Sanctuary, Ghatigaon, Khair trees approximately 40-
50 years old were illegally felled with the aid of machines and were being
transported from the site by a Bharat Benz truck bearing registration number
RJ-29 GB-3499; upon receiving information, the forest staff reached the spot
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8086
2 MCRC-9915-2026
and, despite adverse and difficult circumstances, apprehended Hamid, son of
Izrayal Khan, resident of Alwar, Rajasthan, along with the truck, whereas
Ramnivas Gurjar, son of Hukum Singh Gurjar, resident of Jakhodi, taking
advantage of the darkness of night and his familiarity with the forest routes,
managed to flee from the spot along with his accomplices; in connection
with this incident, Forest Offence Case No. 792/25 dated 16/05/2025 was
registered against the accused persons under Sections 26 and 41 of the Indian
Forest Act, 1927, and Sections 9, 27, 29, 50, and 51 of the Wildlife
Protection Act, 1972, following which seizure proceedings were conducted
during the investigation, and the absconding accused Ramnivas was
subsequently arrested on 04/02/2026.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended
that the applicant has been arrayed as an accused solely on the basis of the
memorandum statement of the co-accused, recorded under Section 27 of the
Indian Evidence Act. Except for the said memorandum statement, there is no
independent, cogent, or corroborative material available on record to prima
facie connect the applicant with the commission of the alleged offence. It is a
settled position of law that a memorandum statement of a co-accused, in the
absence of any independent corroboration, is insufficient to establish
involvement. The conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. The
applicant is a permanent resident of District Gwalior and there is no
likelihood of his absconding or fleeing from justice. The applicant
undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Hon'ble
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8086
3 MCRC-9915-2026
Court and assures that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or
influence any witness. In view of the facts and circumstances stated
hereinabove, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge
the applicant on bail.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the
bail application and prays for its rejection submitting that the applicant has
cirminal antecedents of seven criminal cases out of which two cases are of
similar nature.
6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments
advanced by both the parties coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely
to conclude in near future and prolonged pre- trial detention being an
anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit
of bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, without commenting on merits of the case, this bail
application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand
Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the
concerned Court.
9. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by him;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8086
4 MCRC-9915-2026
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency
of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically,
without further reference to the Bench;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
11. Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
