IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 950 of 2011. Date of decision: 23.11.2011. Desh Raj …..Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. G.D. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S.Rana, Asstt. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 130/2011 dated 15.11.2011 registered at Police Station, Chirgaon, Distt. Shimla, under section 379 IPC and sections 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act. 2. It has been stated in the application that petitioner is owner of three storeyed building and is residing on top storey, whereas the ground floor of the said building has been rented out to Coastal Power Company Dhamwari. The first floor has been rented out to tenants. In July 2011 Sher Bahadur was inducted as tenant who belongs to Nepal and was doing the work of labour supply mate Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… for carriage of apple boxes to the road side. The police had allegedly recovered five quintals of forest herbs Satwa/ Barch from the room rented to Sher Bahadur. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in view of registration of the case. 3. The petitioner is innocent, he is ready to join the investigation, no recovery is to be made from him. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. The investigation in the case is almost complete. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The status report has been filed. It has been stated that case has been registered on the basis of written complaint, which was produced by Mohan Singh on 15.11.2011. It has been stated that complaint was received against Desh Raj that he has kept illegally herbs in his house. The petitioner and his wife were called during investigation but they did not respond, the photographs of the locked room were taken in presence of forest officials and other witnesses and thereafter the lock was broken and from the room 10 gunny bags of different sizes containing Koot (Satwa) weighing 262 kilograms were recovered, which were taken into possession. 5. On 19.11.2011 the petitioner joined the investigation and stated that he had rented out the room to Sher Bahadur (Nepali), but he does not know his complete address. The information given by the petitioner does not appear to be true. The bail application has been opposed and prayer has been made for rejection of bail application. …3… 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The herbs in question have already been taken into possession. The herbs were found in the building of the petitioner and petitioner could not produce any permit/ licence for storing the herbs. It has been alleged that petitioner has committed the offence under section 379 IPC and sections 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act. 7. It has not been stated in the status report that further recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It has come in investigation that investigating agency took into possession the herbs by breaking open the lock. The petitioner was not on the spot when herbs were recovered from the room after breaking open the lock. It has not been stated in the status report for what purpose the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Thus the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail in his favour. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 130/2011 dated 15.11.2011 registered at Police Station, Chirgaon, Distt. Shimla, under section 379 IPC and sections 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer with the conditions that petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating officer and shall not terrorise, overawe any prosecution witness or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. …4… 9. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion over the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of. Copy dasti. November 23, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.