Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:8372 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1366 of 2025 Ramkishun Tadan S/o Shri Lakhiram Tandan Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Birgahni, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18/02/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 559/2024, registered at Police Station – Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 6 and 10 of Chhattisgarh Kirshak Pashu Parikshan Adhiniyam 2004, Section 11(घ) of Pashu Krurata Nivaran Adhiniyam & Section 325 of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant, 2 Ramkishun Tandan, is accused of offences under Sections 4, 6, and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Krishak Pashu Parikshan Adhiniyam, 2004, Section 11(घ) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. It is alleged that between the intervening night of 20.12.2024 and 21.12.2024, near the cemented road between villages Jourela and Dhabadih, he and co-accused persons Vikas Banjare, Rameshwar Prasad Shastri, Dipak Kant, and Manjeet Jangde tied 60-70 cattle, including Krishak Pashu and Bachhada, of red, black, and white colors. They allegedly planned to transport these animals outside the state illegally and loaded them onto a truck (registration No. MP-50-H-1399). Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the prosecution has not seized any property from the possession of present applicant, he is villager and is working agriculturist and he has no intention to sale and sent the shelter house. He also submits that other co-accused person, namely, Radheshyam Dhritlahre has already been granted Anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.01.2025 in MCRC No. 62/2025 and the case of present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent, the applicant is in jail since 21.12.2024, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its 3 conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant, along with other co-accused, tied 60-70 cattle, including Krishak Pashu and Bachhada, of red, black, and white colors, and they allegedly planned to transport these animals outside the state illegally and loaded them onto a truck (registration No. MP-50-H-1399), therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 21.12.2024, the fact that though the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, tied 60-70 cattle, including Krishak Pashu and Bachhada, of red, black, and white colors, and they allegedly planned to transport these animals outside the state illegally and loaded them onto a truck (registration No. MP-50-H- 1399), but other co-accused person, namely, Radheshyam Dhritlahre has already been granted Anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.01.2025 in MCRC No. 62/2025 and the case of present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, he has no 4 criminal antecedents, and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant- Ramkishun Tadan, involved in Crime No. 559/2024, registered at Police Station – Pamgarh, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 6 and 10 of Chhattisgarh Kirshak Pashu Parikshan Adhiniyam 2004, Section 11(घ) of Pashu Krurata Nivaran Adhiniyam & Section 325 of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 5 proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan