A local court has dismissed the bail application of a 40-year-old forest guard, Raghwinder Singh posted in Panchkula, in connection with the illegal felling of around 500 Khair trees in the forest area of Asrewali village. However, an SIT probe in the case later revealed that around 1,148 Khair trees were illegally felled from the forest area.
The accused, a native of Bathinda, was residing in Peer Muchalla in SAS Nagar. The case was registered at Chandimandir police station on March 10 under Sections 32 and 33 of the Indian Forest Act, Sections 27 and 29 of the Wildlife Protection Act, and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The complaint in the matter was filed by the wildlife inspector, Panchkula.
According to the case details, the accused had initially informed authorities about the illegal felling of Khair trees while patrolling the forest area on February 25 and had requested registration of an FIR. However, during the course of investigation, he was later joined in the probe and formally arrested on March 15.
During investigation, police recovered a certain amount believed to be the sale proceeds of Khair wood, along with approximately 10 quintals of the wood.
Counsel for the accused argued that he was a whistleblower who had reported the illegal felling and had been falsely implicated in the case. It was further submitted that, apart from the disclosure statement of a co-accused, there was no incriminating evidence against him.
{{/usCountry}}Counsel for the accused argued that he was a whistleblower who had reported the illegal felling and had been falsely implicated in the case. It was further submitted that, apart from the disclosure statement of a co-accused, there was no incriminating evidence against him.
{{/usCountry}}However, the prosecution contended that the accused’s name had surfaced in the disclosure statement of co-accused Imran Khan and had also appeared multiple times in conversations between co-accused Imran Khan and Suresh. The prosecution further argued that the investigation was at a nascent stage and the arrest of other co-accused was still pending.
While dismissing the bail application on April 4, the court of the additional sessions judge observed that, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the role attributed to the accused, and the fact that the investigation is still at an early stage, no grounds for granting bail were made out.