Completed investigation, clean antecedents and confession-only implication supported bail for the accused.

The prosecution alleged that, acting on credible information received on 11 August 2026, forest officials apprehended Accused Nos. 1 and 2 and recovered four tiger canines, one tiger claw, two tiger molar teeth, a mobile phone and other articles from them.

They were arrested and remanded to judicial custody; their bail application was rejected by the Sessions Court.

Accused Nos. 3 and 4 were implicated on the basis of Accused Nos. 1 and 2’s confession statements, and their anticipatory-bail application was also rejected by the Sessions Court.

The accused sought regular and anticipatory bail in proceedings arising from WLOR No. 04/2026–2027, registered for alleged offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

The petitions were considered under Sections 483 and 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, respectively, for regular and anticipatory bail.

The alleged offences were under Sections 2(31), 39, 44, 49(b) and 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972; the Court noted that the maximum punishment was seven years’ imprisonment.

The Court applied its discretion to grant bail, taking account of the alleged role of each group of accused, the completion of the investigation, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the proposed cooperation with the trial and investigation.

No precedent was cited.

The Court noted that Accused Nos. 1 and 2 had been apprehended with the alleged tiger parts and had been in custody since 11 August 2026.

As to Accused Nos. 3 and 4, the Court observed that they were implicated only through the arrested co-accused’s confession statements, and that the prosecution did not claim those statements said the petitioners possessed the seized articles.

The investigation was complete, the petitioners had no criminal antecedents, and they undertook to cooperate with the proceedings.

In those circumstances, the Court considered bail appropriate, subject to conditions.

In Crl.P. No. 15226 of 2026, the petitioners were granted anticipatory bail, subject to appearing before the Investigating Officer within 15 days, executing a bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties, attending court, cooperating with the investigation, not tampering with witnesses, and not committing similar offences.

In Crl.P. No. 15526 of 2026, the petitioners were granted regular bail on execution of a bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties and subject to conditions concerning court attendance, witness protection, and future conduct.