UMED SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh, whereby accused-revisionist was found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 2, 9, 39, 49, 50, 51, 57 of the Wildlife Protection Act and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act as well as judgment and order dated 19.05.2015 passed by Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, whereby appeal, preferred by the accused revisionist, was dismissed.

(2.) Mr. Deep Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the accusedrevisionist, submits that accused-revisionist is a very very poor man and there is no friend or family members who could move bail application on behalf of the accused-revisionist, therefore, he is languishing in jail right from 22.02.2013 and has undergone two years ten months imprisonment out of three years awarded by both the Courts below.

(3.) Mr. Deep Joshi, Advocate, is also engaged on behalf of the accused-revisionist by the State Legal Services Authority.