Lal vs State
2025 Latest Caselaw 4020 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Lal vs State on 1 September, 2025

             Office Notes,
            reports, orders
            or proceedings
SL.   Dat
             or directions                                  COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.    e
            and Registrar's
              order with
              Signatures

                              Bail Application (IA No. 01 of 2025)
                              In
                              CRLR No. 499 of 2025

                              Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Ravi Bisht, learned counsel for the Revisionist.

2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. The present Criminal Revision is being filed challenging the judgment and order dated 25.06.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnprayag, District Chamoli in Criminal Appeal No. 09 of 2023, titled as "Suresh Lal vs. State," under Sections 9, 11, and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, whereby the learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revisionist. The Revisionist also seeks to challenge the impugned order dated 05.04.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge, Tharali, District Chamoli, in Criminal Case No. 81 of 2018, titled as "State vs. Suresh Lal," under Sections 9, 11, and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, whereby the learned Trial Court convicted the Revisionist and sentenced him to three years of simple imprisonment under Section 51 of the said Act, along with a fine of ₹10,000/-. In default of payment of the fine, he was directed to undergo one month of simple imprisonment.

4. Admit.

5. Issue notice to Respondent No. 2.

6. Steps to be taken within a week.

7. List this case on 27.10.2025.

8. Heard on the Bail Application (IA No. 1 of 2025).

9. Learned counsel for the Revisionist submits that during the trial, the Revisionist was on bail and did not violate any condition imposed upon him. He further submits that, if granted bail, the Revisionist will adhere to all conditions imposed by this Hon'ble Court. Accordingly, he prays that the bail application be allowed.

10. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application, stating that one leopard skin was recovered from the possession of the Revisionist. The leopard is a Schedule I species under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, and therefore, the offence is of a serious nature. It is prayed that the bail application be rejected.

11. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that, at this stage, sufficient grounds exist for granting bail without delving into the merits of the case. Considering that the revisionist was on bail during the pendency of the trial and did not misuse the conditions imposed, bail is hereby granted.

12. Accordingly, the Revisionist- Suresh Lal shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

13. It is clarified that the grant of bail shall not be treated as a ground for seeking adjournments or for delaying the disposal of the present Revision.

(Ashish Naithani, J.) 01.09.2025 Shiksha