2025:UHC:3787
| SL. No. | Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures | COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS |
| BA1 No. 780 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Swaleha Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Dy.A.G. along with Mr. V.S. Pal, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant–Santu Singh S/o Shri Khantu Singh is in judicial custody since 26.02.2025 and seeking bail in relation to Range Case Crime No.0006 of 2025, registered on the basis of FIR dated 26.02.2025 at Police Station Kalsi, District Dehradun, wherein the present applicant has been charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 2, 9, 39, 49, 50 and 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and, in fact, there is no proper compliance of Section 50 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and, furthermore, the alleged identification of bear bile was done without any scientific verification and there is no independent witness of the seizure memo. 5. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, and, furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history. 6. On the other side, learned State counsel have not disputed this fact that |
1
the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant and on written instruction, they have also not disputed this fact that the present applicant has no previous criminal history.
7. After hearing the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has already been filed and there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, and, furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant, namely, Santu Singh, be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
13.05.2025
R.Bisht
2
3
Comments