Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 123 (UTT)

Asif v. State of Uttarakhand

2023-01-20

RAVINDRA MAITHANI

body2023
JUDGMENT Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant Asif has sought anticipatory bail in Range Case No.35 of 2022-23, under Section 41 read with Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Section 4 read with Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Protection of Trees in Rural and Hilly Areas Act, 1976 and Rules 3/28 of the Uttarakhand Transit of Timber and Other Forest Produce Rules, 2012, Range Laksar, Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on anticipatory bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the case, the Forest Officers were on patrolling duty when they noted that the applicant was standing with intention to cut the trees. The applicant was along with the co-accused. When they spotted Forest Officers, according to the case, they managed to escape. 4. Learned State counsel would submit that no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. They have not committed any offence. Learned State counsel would submit that State does not purpose to file any objection. According to him, offence is serious. 5. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for anticipatory bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant be released on anticipatory bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation. (ii) The applicant shall not approach any witness/victim in any manner, whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court. (iv) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the Investigating Officer. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case, if he does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the Investigating Officer. (v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.