MASHKOOR ULLAH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first bail application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No./POR No. 28088/2006, registered at Office of Forest Range Officer, Forest Circle Berasiya, District-Bhopal (M.P.), for the offence punishable under Sections 9, 39, 48(A), 50 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as 'Act 1972') and Section 41 of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred as 'Act 1927').

(2.) According to prosecution case, on 16.04.2020, in the night at about 12:30 o'clock, Forest Official (Van Chowkidar) informed the Forest Guard through mobile phone that he heard fire shot's noise in room No. R.F.111. Thereafter within an hour, the Forest team reached the spot and saw two persons standing near Scorpio car (MH-04-DR-5828) and Bolero car (MP-04-CA-4922). Range Officer identified them as Soyeb Qureshi and Haseen Khan. While searching the car, the officials found the body parts of Nilgai as well as one rifle. On asking, the accused persons stated that they hunted Nilgai with said rifle. On investigation, Forest Official found that the Bolero jeep is registered in the name of present applicant and he fled away from the spot. The applicant was the license holder of rifle which was alleged to have been used in crime.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person has falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that applicant was not spotted on incident place. The police involved the present applicant in crime being owner of Bolero jeep and having license of allegedly used weapon but said jeep was sent by brother of applicant for pulling Scorpio car and weapon was recovered from other co-accused. He further submits that the offences levelled against the applicant are bailable in nature as same are not having punishment of more than three years. He also produced the copy of order passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C No. 20732/2020 (Panjosh Pardhi Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh) wherein the Court relying upon the order passed by High Court of Chhatishgarh, in the case of Arjun Singh Vs. State of Chhatishgarh in M.Cr.C. No. 774/2012 dated 20.02.2015 observed that under the Act 1972, if the offences levelled are not having punishment of more than three years, same are considered to be bailable. In the present case, all the offences do not have punishment of more than three years and thus same are bailable. He further submits that co-accused of case have already been enlarged on bail by this High Court as well as trial Court. He also submits that the applicant is under medical treatment and at present due to spread of 'Covid 19' pandemic, he is worried for his arrest on health issues too. Withe the aforesaid, he prays for allowing this bail application.