Bail to accused in poaching case cancelled

Nagpur: The District & Additional Sessions Judge GP Shirsat on Friday cancelled bail granted to 13 Pench tiger poaching case accused by Ramtek Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) MS Banchare.

The Ramtek court on September 1, had released 13 accused on bail without the say of investigating forest officers, despite specific request by the APP. After three days, 3 more accused were released on bail.

Perturbed by the decision, forest department on September 4, through its special counsel Kartik Shukul assisted by Abhilash Shriwas, challenged the lower court order in Sessions Court at Nagpur.

Shukul argued that bail was not granted on merit but on the grounds that investigation was over and the accused were in jail for one month. Both these aspects according to him were irrelevant for the purpose of granting bail in the facts of the case.

Shukul argued that till now 150 tiger bones, 12 nails, weapon and whiskers have been seized. However, the probe has not been completed and as per the confessional statements of the accused, 4 tiger paws, tiger teeth and other tiger body parts are yet to be recovered. If the bail of the accused is not cancelled, then there was every possibility that the accused would tamper with evidence.

He further said that the JMFC Ramtek ignored mandatory provisions of Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 as well as Indian Forest Act 1927. In addition to this, various precedents of High Court as well as Supreme Court were ignored by the JMFC, thereby leading to miscarriage of injustice.

Counsel for accused Prakash Jaiswal argued that the IOs have misconducted themselves and that there are allegations of custodial brutality. He stated that the precedents quoted by the prosecution would not apply since the facts of those cases were different. He further stated that the accused had been behind bars for a long time and that they are not guilty of the offences alleged against them.

However, upholding Shukul's arguments that releasing the accused, especially when crime is of serious nature involving hunting of tigers, and one where the evidence is yet to be recovered would be highly incorrect.

The Sessions Court said that the lower court should have granted bail just because charge sheet has been filed by the forest department. The order seems to have been passed in a haste by the Ramtek court. The Sessions judge also relied upon the case of tiger skin trader Suraj Pal, whereby Justice Sunil Shukre at the High Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused in tiger poaching case.

Now that the bail has been rejected, all the accused will have to be arrested again. Sources said the department may challenge bail granted to remaining three accused. In all 16 accused were released on bail. One accused Mahadeo Uikey was found dead after he escaped from custody.