MP High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Eating Sambar Deer, Says No Link Between Him & Meat Recovered From Spot

Granting bail to a man accused of cooking and eating the meat of Sambar deer in the PWD guesthouse at Nagod, the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the forest officials failed to establish a link between the applicant with the recovered meat as the FSL report was still awaited.

The court also observed that no body part of Sambar deer was found from which it can be  inferred that the meat cooked at the guesthouse was prima facie of a "wild animal". 

Perusing the case dairy, Justice Devnarayan Mishra in his order noted that it appeared that the forest officials got a "secret information" that some persons are having a party involving Sambar meat at PWD Guest House, Nagod, "but except this tip, till today, the forest officials have not linked the applicant from the meat recovered from the spot as the FSL report is still awaited".

The court further said that the forest officials also "failed to disclose" that from where and by whom the deer was hunted.

"No body part of Sambar was found from which it can be inferred that the meat that was cooked at PWD Guest House, Nagod, prima facie, was of wild animal Sambar. In the statements of forest officials, though they have stated that the persons apprehended were having a party of meat at PWD Guest House, but they have not clearly mentioned that the meat cooked in the party was of wild animal Sambar. Till today, the forest officials failed to establish the relation of other co-accused, who alleged to have hunted the wild animal. From their statements, it is also not clear as to from which compartment/reserved forest or protected forest, the wild animal was hunted"

The applicant refuted the allegations of cooking and eating the wild animal, claiming that he had gone to pick up his tenant, from the guesthouse.

Counsel for the State opposed the bail plea, contending that the applicant had criminal records, one of a vehicle accident and another of fighting. It was argued that the applicant, along with other people, was consuming the meat of the animal listed in Schedule I–a wild animal. 

The court thus allowed the bail plea without commenting on the merits of the case.

Case Title: Sandeep Singh Parihar v State of MP (MCRC-40989-2025)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 211

For Applicant: Advocate Devendra Kumar Shukla

For State: Advocate K.S. Patel

Click here to read/download the Order