AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 254 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant Deepak Chimwal is in judicial custody in FIR No.18 of 2023 (Range Case No.7/Daichori/2022-23), under Sections 26 and 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Sections 39 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Police Station- Kaladungi, District- Nainital. He has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 27.01.2023, 9 kgs elephant tusk were recovered from the custody of the applicant and co-accused, which they had kept in a private vehicle.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no independent witness; applicant is innocent; he is not a previous convict; applicant wife is expecting a child in the month of April.
Learned State Counsel would submit that it is the case of recovery of elephant tusk from the applicant and the co-accused. But he would agree that the bail rejection order does not reveal any previous conviction of the applicant.
Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant 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.
Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for the parties, today itself, on payment of usual charges.
