2. 16.7.2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26589 of 2008 PRAMOD RAM Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- Heard. The forest officials had the information that the petitioner had stored the hides of deer and other endangered animals after killing them in the Balmiki Forest Reserve. It appears from the prosecution report that the petitioner had constructed a house inside the forest area and on search of the house the hides as per the description memo were recovered. The contention is that the witnesses to the seizure were the persons who were forming the raiding party and independent witness was associated with the seizure. The second contention is that the petitioner is in custody since 1.4.2008. It was thirdly contended that the case is of false implication that the petitioner has constructed a house inside the reserved forest area, if one could go through the written report which is the basis of the prosecution one could find that the seizure was made by the S.S.P. and the seizure was witnessed by two independent persons Nagina Mahto and Bind Mahto. The prosecution has not concealed the fact that the petitioner has constructed a house inside the reserved forest area. There is definite recovery from the house of the petitioner of hides of endangered animals and considering that I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. Petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )