A local court has dismissed the anticipatory bail application of a 29-year-old Yamunanagar resident, accused of illegally transporting Khair wood.
The accused, Mustfa, was booked under Sections 317(2) (dishonestly receiving or retaining stolen property) and 303(2) (theft) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at Sector 7 police station on January 21.
The case was registered after police recovered 22 logs of Khair wood from an abandoned Haryana-registered loading vehicle whose driver had fled the spot.
Unexplained delay of 4 months, argues defence
The petitioner’s counsel argued that Mustfa had been implicated in the case after an unexplained delay of four months and 10 days and that there was no direct evidence linking him to the offence.
According to the prosecution, a police patrolling team noticed a loading vehicle moving at high speed near the Ghaggar Bridge area. On being chased, the driver abandoned the vehicle and escaped. During inspection, police found the vehicle loaded with Khair wood. A report from the forest department confirmed that the recovered wood belonged to the prohibited Khair species, whose cutting and transportation are restricted under law. The recovered timber was valued at ₹3.2 lakh.
The prosecution further alleged that Mustfa had purchased the vehicle from one Irfan in the name of Haroon and subsequently used it for transporting the illegal timber. Investigators also relied on call detail records (CDR) and mobile location analysis, which allegedly placed the petitioner near the spot at the relevant time. The prosecution informed the court that Mustfa was also involved in two other criminal cases.
{{/usCountry}}The prosecution further alleged that Mustfa had purchased the vehicle from one Irfan in the name of Haroon and subsequently used it for transporting the illegal timber. Investigators also relied on call detail records (CDR) and mobile location analysis, which allegedly placed the petitioner near the spot at the relevant time. The prosecution informed the court that Mustfa was also involved in two other criminal cases.
{{/usCountry}}Custodial questioning necessary, court observes
While rejecting the bail plea on June 8, additional sessions judge Bikramjit Aroura observed that, considering the seriousness of the allegations, the recovery of prohibited forest produce, and the material collected during the investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner was necessary for a fair and effective probe.