Grant of bail for death of wild elephant caused by illegal electricity connection for domestic use.

The applicant, Birendra, was arrested on September 9, 2025, in connection with the death of a wild elephant.

On September 7, 2025, a Forest Guard discovered the carcass of an elephant near a residence in village Mahavirganj.

Investigations revealed that the elephant died due to electrocution from live wires connected illegally for domestic or agricultural purposes by the applicant and another individual.

Following the investigation, the Forest Range Officer filed a charge sheet under the Wild Life (Protection) Act.

The applicant sought regular bail, contending he had no criminal history and that there was no intent to hunt the animal.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the offense and the duration of his pretrial detention.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 [corresponding to Section 439 CrPC] regarding the High Court's power to grant bail.

The substantive charges were brought under Sections 2, 9, 50, 51, and 52 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, which regulate the protection of wild animals and provide penalties for hunting and related offenses.

The Court also referenced procedural conditions for bail under Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 84 of the BNSS to ensure the applicant's presence during trial.

The Court evaluated the application by balancing the gravity of the allegations against the applicant's personal circumstances.

It noted that the charge sheet had already been filed, meaning the custodial investigation was complete.

The Court took significant note of the fact that the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents.

Furthermore, the Court observed that the applicant had been in custody since September 9, 2025, and concluded that since the trial was likely to take a considerable amount of time, continued detention was not warranted.

The lack of specific intent to trap or hunt the animal—given the wires were reportedly for domestic/agricultural use—served as a mitigating factor for the purpose of granting bail.

The holding is that the applicant is entitled to bail subject to furnishing a personal bond with two sureties.

The Court imposed several conditions, including an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

Mandatory appearance on all trial dates.

Specific personal appearance during the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

Failure to comply would allow the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of the liberty of bail.