Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 16, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Lundariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 February, 2026

Author: Subodh Abhyankar

Bench: Subodh Abhyankar

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4976




                                                               1                           MCRC-60192-2025
                             IN        THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                         BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
                                                ON THE 18th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
                                             MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 60192 of 2025
                                                        LUNDARIYA
                                                           Versus
                                               THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Kunjan Mittal - Advocate for the applicant.
                                  Shri Tarun Pagare-GA appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].

                                                                   ORDER
                                  1]    They are heard. Perused the case-diary.
                                  2]    This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section

482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.1904/2011 registered at Police Station Forest Department Thandla, District Jhabua for the offence punishable under Section 26(1)(A)/26(1)(E)/26(1)(F)/26(1)(G)/26(1)(H)/66/67 of the Indian Forest Act, section 2(i)/15/25(B)/9/39/50/51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act and section 2(C)(E)/7/55/58 of the Biological Diversity Act.

3] The allegation against the applicant is of cutting of 86 trees. 4] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the offences alleged against the applicant, except Section 9 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act of 1972), are bailable Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO SARKAR Signing time: 2/18/2026 5:17:50 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4976 2 MCRC-60192-2025 offences, and this aspect could not be considered by the trial Court as it was not raised before the trial Court.

5] Counsel for the applicant has also submitted that it is an admitted fact that no hunting has taken place in the present case, which fact has also not been disputed by counsel for the State.

6] Counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that appropriate orders may be passed.

7] In view of the aforesaid, the application itself is not maintainable as all the offences alleged against the applicant are bailable offences and section 9 of the Act of 1972 is admittedly out of the purview of the action of the applicant, and in such circumstances, although the application itself is not maintainable, however, the concerned police station is directed to act accordingly, considering the bailable nature of the offence.

8] With the aforesaid observation, the present application stands disposed of.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE das Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO SARKAR Signing time: 2/18/2026 5:17:50 PM