Grant of bail for elephant electrocution death where illegal wire connection lacked specific hunting intent.

The applicant, Rambaran, filed a first bail application after being arrested on September 9, 2025, in connection with the death of a wild elephant.

On September 7, 2025, forest authorities discovered the carcass of an elephant near the applicant's residence in village Mahavirganj.

Investigations revealed that the applicant and another individual had established an illegal electricity connection by drawing live wires; the elephant died due to electrocution from these wires.

The Forest Range Officer subsequently filed a charge sheet for offenses under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

The applicant contended that the connection was meant for domestic/agricultural use and not for hunting.

1. 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 primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant bail.

It considered the penal provisions under Sections 2, 9, 50, 51, and 52 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, concerning the hunting and protection of wild animals.

Additionally, the court referenced procedural compliance under Sections 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (punishment for non-appearance), 269 (personal attendance of accused), and 351 (recording of statement) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

The Court weighed the gravity of the allegations—the electrocution of a protected animal through illegal wiring—against the procedural status of the case and the applicant's personal history.

The Court noted that the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had already been filed.

Significantly, the Court observed that the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents.

Given that the applicant had been in custody since September 9, 2025 (approximately five months), and that the trial was likely to take a considerable amount of time to conclude, the Court determined that further pretrial detention was not warranted.

The Court utilized its discretion to grant bail, balancing the interests of justice with the applicant's liberty.

The holding is conditioned upon the applicant's strict adherence to trial schedules, including prohibitions against seeking unnecessary adjournments and mandatory appearances for the framing of charges and recording of statements.

Failure to comply with these conditions allows the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty and initiate proceedings under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.