Shree Prahalad Singh Chilwal & ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2812 UK

 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            Criminal Revision No. 390 of 2022


Shree Prahalad Singh Chilwal & another ...Revisionists

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand                                ...Respondent


Present:-
            Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate for the revisionists.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this revision is made to the

following judgment and orders:-

(i) Judgment and order dated 30.06.2017,

passed in Criminal Case No. 1827 of 2014,

State Vs. Prahalad Singh Chilwal & another,

by the court of Judicial Magistrate 2nd,

Haldwani, District Nainital ("the case"). By it,

the revisionists were convicted and

sentenced under Section 51 read with

Section 3/39 of the Wild Life Protection Act,

1972 ("the Act").

(ii) Judgment and order dated 30.06.2022,

passed in Criminal Appeal No. 91 of 2017,

Prahalad Singh Chilwal & another Vs. State,

by the court of 2nd Additional Sessions

Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital. By it, the

judgment and order passed the case has

been confirmed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and

perused the record.

3. The revision has been admitted.

4. Heard on the bail application.

5. When admission was made, it was argued on

behalf of the revisionists that procedure is illegal because

in view of Section 55 of the Act, the complaint in the

instant case and cognizance could have been taken only on

a complaint and not on the Police report. It was also

argued that in the instant case, cognizance was taken on

the police report and the officer, who had filed FIR and

submitted police report is not an officer.

6. It is submitted that the revisionists were on bail

during trial and in the appeal. Although, today date is fixed

for final hearing, but, learned counsel for the revisionist

would submit that copies of some more documents is to be

taken by the revisionists, therefore, a week after the case

may be fixed for final hearing.

7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that

the revisionists are entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail

application deserves to be allowed.

8. The bail application is allowed. The execution of

the sentence appealed against is suspended till the

disposal of the revision.

9. Let the revisionists be released on bail, during

the pendency of this revision, on their executing a personal

bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like

amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

10. Learned State Counsel also submits that he be

permitted to take copy of the records. Learned State

Counsel may apply for the copies and he may be provided,

as per rules.

11. List this matter on 22.09.2022 for final hearing.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 06.09.2022 AK