Judgment Harbans Lal, J.-Heard learned Counsel for petitioner Darra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents in the case diary produced before me. 2. Learned Counsel has contended which could not be controverted by the learned Public Prosecutor that co-accused Ralla Khan and Hazari have been enlarged on bail in this case by this Court and the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from their case. The petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of interrogation of co-accused which is not legally admissible evidence. The only evidence against him is his own confessional statement and the confessional statement of co-accused. It is further contended that neither any incriminating article has been recovered nor there is any other direct or circumstantial evidence against him to connect him with the alleged poaching of wild life. It is further submitted that the petitioner is being made to face the trial due to reports of the wide spread poaching of wild life in the forest areas of the State and the interest shown by the Central Government and the State Government in tackling the menace of extension of the precious wild life. But further detention of the petitioner in custody without there being any legal evidence against him is not warranted. 3. While opposing the bail application, learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that from his confessional statement and the confessional statement of the co-accused, it is clear that he is indulging in poaching of wild life, but he could not point out anything from the record on the basis of which the complicity/involvement of the petitioner in poaching of the wild animal life can be established. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made at the bar, the nature of accusation, the materials on record and all other facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that similarly situated co-accused have already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present petitioner is not in any way distinguishable from their case, the petitioner also deserves the same treatment. In the result, this bail application under Section 439, CrPC is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Darra s/o Ramsahai shall be released on bail in Criminal Case No. 23/187/05 pending in the Court of ACJM No. 1, Alwar for the offences under Sections 2/16, 2/26, 2/35, 9, 27, 31, 39, 44, 48-A, 49-A, B, 50 and 51 of the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court undertaking to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing until conclusion of the trial.