Mastu And Others ...... ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 313 UK

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            Criminal Revision No. 713 of 2022
                              With
               Bail Application (IA) No.2 of 2022


Mastu and Others                                ...... Appellants

                                Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                           ..... Respondent


Mr. M.S. Pal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Pankaj Goswami and Mr.
B.S. Koranga, Advocate for the revisionists.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.



Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this revision is made to

the following:-

(i) Judgment and order dated 04.07.2007,

passed in Criminal Case No.748 of 2004,

State Vs. Mastu and Others, by the

Judicial Magistrate, Ramnagar, District

Nainital. By it, the revisionist has been

convicted and sentenced under Section 51

of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

(ii) Judgment and order dated

22.12.2020, passed in Criminal Appeal

No.28 of 2007, Mastu and Others vs. State

of Uttarakhand, by the court of District

and Sessions Judge, Nainital. By it, the

judgment and order dated 04.07.2007,

passed in the case, has been affirmed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists

and perused the record.

3. According to the prosecution case, elephant

tusks were recovered from the revisionist-Mastu. After

the recovery, the revisionist-Mastu got recovered 20

kilograms of tusks from a place. The other revisionists

have been assigned other roles regarding sale and

concealment of the tusks.

4. Learned senior counsel for the revisionists

would submit that, in fact, the conviction is not based

on any scientific evidence. There has been no forensic

record.

5. Learned State counsel would submit that

tusk is a material, which could be identified by the forest

officials.

6. Having considered, this Court is of the view

that this matter requires deliberation.

7. Admit.

8. LCR has already been received.

9. List this matter for hearing on 09.05.2023.

10. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.2 of 2022.

11. The learned senior counsel appearing for

the revisionists would submit that sentence is of three

years on four revisionists and one revisionist has been

sentenced for six months and all of them have

undergone more than three months imprisonment.

12. Having considered the entirety of the fact, this

Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the

revisionist deserves to be enlarged on bail.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. The execution of the sentence appealed

against shall remain suspended during pendency of the

revision.

15. Let the revisionist be released on bail, on his

executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable

sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of

the court concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) Vacation Judge 24.01.2023

PR/A