Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1124 (MP)

Dharampal v. State Of M. P.

2020-10-14

V.P.S.CHAUHAN

body2020
JUDGMENT Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan, J. - Case diary is available with learned Panel Lawyer. 2. This is second application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. 3. First application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27/9/2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No.39626/2019. 4. The applicant is in custody since 29/8/2019 in connection with Forest Crime No.28060/2018 registered by Tiger Strike Force, Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 2, 9, 39, 44, 48, 48A, 49B, 51, 52, 57 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed. Learned trial Court proceeded for trial and recorded statement of witness. Copy of statement of Devendra Singh Parste (PW-1) has been filed along with this application. 5. Draped in brevity, the allegation against the applicant is that Tiger Strike Force received tip off that some persons are standing near hotel Rishi Regency and they were selling scales of Pangolin endangered species. Tiger Strike Force reached at spot and apprehended three persons who furnished information that they had received the scales from the applicant. Thereafter members of the Tiger Strike Force went to the house of the applicant. Applicant furnished information that he was having a Pangolin and that Pangolin died that's why he threw body of the Pangolin in the river. Tiger Strike Force seized some scales of Pangolin from the house of the applicant. 6. Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has submitted this second application for grant of bail mainly on two grounds. Firstly, there is a provision in Clause (6) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C. that if any case triable by Magistrate, not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate. However, the trial has not yet been completed which is pending, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. Secondly, Devendra Kumar Parste (PW-1) has been examined before the trial Court and in para-18 and 21 of his deposition, he categorically stated that scales of Pangolin are just like shells. However, the trial has not yet been completed which is pending, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. Secondly, Devendra Kumar Parste (PW-1) has been examined before the trial Court and in para-18 and 21 of his deposition, he categorically stated that scales of Pangolin are just like shells. Pangolin casted off old scales of his body and new scales are formed in place of old scales and that casted off scales are usually found in the forest and the persons who received the scales collected that scales in home. Learned senior counsel further submits that the applicant only collected scales which found abandoned in the forest. He has falsely been implicated in this case. He is not any nexus with any other co-accused. Learned senior counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar alias Raj Kumar Rathore Vs. State of M.P., 2000 3 Crimes 388 . In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 7. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer vehementaly opposes the aforesaid prayer and submits that first applicant has been dismissed on merits and there is no change in circumstance. The applicant is a part of racket who involved in selling of the organs of endangered animal and smuggling that organs in the Country and abroad, therefore, prays for dismissal of the application. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the case diary. 9. No doubt, Clause (6) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C. is mandatory in case trial Court not concluded trial within a period of sixty days from the date fixed for taking evidence and if person is in custody, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate. But, in this section it is engrafted 'unless for the reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.' No doubt, the applicant has not filed any application before the trial Court mentioning Clause (6) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C., but, this Court can consider this fact in the present application. Statement of first witness had been recorded on 7/1/2020. Thereafter there was lock-down imposed from the day of 25th March, 2020 in connection with Novel COVID-19 pandemic and it is made clear that since then regular trial of the Courts has been held up by the order of superior Court. Statement of first witness had been recorded on 7/1/2020. Thereafter there was lock-down imposed from the day of 25th March, 2020 in connection with Novel COVID-19 pandemic and it is made clear that since then regular trial of the Courts has been held up by the order of superior Court. In these circumstances, this cannot be said that trial Court was not vigilant in concluding the trial within time. 10. It is reflected from the case diary that scales of the endangered Pangolin was found in the possession of the applicant and other co-accused informed Tiger Strike Force that they had received the scales from the applicant. There is prima facie evidence available on record for involvement of the applicant with other co-accused because they were found with the scales of Pangolin and scales of Pangolin also seized from the house of the applicant. No doubt, the case is triable by the Court of JMFC, but, so far as taking note of the act of the applicant, it is found that he is equally involved in selling and smuggling the organs of the endangered species. In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 11. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant is hereby dismissed.