Noresh Ganju and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER

10.01.2024

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused persons and Mr. I. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. D. Gogoi, learned Page No.# 2/3 Special P.P. for the forest department.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by accused persons namely, Sri Noresh Ganju and Sri Dhiren Ganju, who have been languishing in jail hazot in connection with the B.R. of 09/2023, under Sections 27/29/31/50/51 of the Wildlife Protection Act and under Sections 33/34/35/40/41/49 of the Assam Forest Rules, for granting bail.

¶3The said case has been registered on the basis of a W.T. Massage issued by the IO of Burpahar Range, Ghorakati, on 19.11.2023. The essence of allegation made in the FIR is that on 18.11.2023, one Norash Ganju and Dhiren Ganju, entered into the Bagser Reserve Forest under Kaziranga Notional Park and Tiger Reserve and felled the tress in the Reserve.

¶4Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused persons were arrested on 19.11.2023, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazot for last 53 days and that their further custodial detention may not be required, in the interest of investigation. Mr. Biswas further submits that there was no allegation of killing any animal in the Reserve and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition.

¶5On the other hand Mr. Borthakur, learned counsel for the State respondent submits that the Forest Department will be filing offence report very soon and the same may be called for.

¶6Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record. Page No.# 3/3

¶7It appears that the accused persons were arrested on 19.11.2023, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazot for last 53 days and considering his period of detention, this Court is of the view that their further custodial detention seems to be unwarranted here, in the interest of investigation.

¶8Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- each only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM [M], Kaliabor, the accused persons be enlarged on bail.

¶9In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010003262024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./75/2024 NORESH GANJU AND ANR S/O SRI RAMANANDA GANJU, R/O VILL- SECONEE PATHAR, P.S.- JAKHALABANDHA, P.O.-JAKHALABANDHA, DIST-NAGAON (ASSAM), PIN- 782136 2: DHIREN GANJU S/O LATE BONDHUWA GANJU R/O VILL-SECONEE PATHAR P.S.-JAKHALABANDHA DIST-NAGAON (ASSAM) PIN-78213 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN