IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No.144 of 2010. Decided on: 17th March, 2010. _______________________________________________________ Sukh Dev ….Petitioner Versus State of HP. ……..Respondent. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting1? For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General and Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ SURINDER SINGH, J (Oral) Report filed. Matter considered. As per report, vide FIR No.31 of 2010 dated 21st February, 2010, under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 32, 33, 42 and 42 of the Forest Act a case has been registered against the petitioner in Police Station, Rohru. It is alleged that the forest officials found illicit felling of a tree in the Protected Forest. On suspicion, they raided the house of the petitioner and recovered 187 scants. The petitioner alleged that it was a TD timber sanctioned by the Forest Department way back in the year 1993, but the timber recovered did not contain the TD hammer. Since the recovery of the timber as well as the instruments used for felling and converting the trees into scants have been effected, in these circumstances the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is of no use. Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a non- bailable offence. Pursuant to the last order, the petitioner had been joining the investigation. In these circumstances, the petitioner’s apprehension is genuine and has a case for grant of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the interim order dated 24th February, 2010 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions and also that the petitioner shall not indulge into the illicit felling of trees in future. The observations made hereinabove are strictly for the disposal of this bail petition and the same shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. If the parties apply for copy urgently, it be supplied to them forthwith as per rules. The petition shall stand disposed of. March 17, 2010. (Surinder Singh), J. (rc)