Allowed

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC23 Aug 2022A.B.A./4593/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand considered an anticipatory bail application by the owner of a vehicle allegedly involved in a fatal highway accident and illegal sand transportation. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions of cooperation with the investigation and surrender before the session judge within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within four weeks, furnishing a bail bond and sureties, and cooperating with the investigation.

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 4593 of 2022

¶3

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal …… Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite party

¶5

----- -----

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶7

-----

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Spl.P.P.

¶9

Order No.06/ Dated:23.08.2022

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Torpa P.S. Case No. 32 of 2022 instituted under Sections 337/338/304(A)/427/414 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4/21 of Mines Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 and Rule 54 of Minor Minerals Concession Rule, 2014 and Rule 9/13 of Jharkhand Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation Rule, 2017, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the F.I.R. Petitioner is the owner of the seized hywa vehicle. On 19.04.2022, the vehicle collided with the said Force Passenger vehicle at about 19.45 hours in which three persons died and driver of the vehicle managed to escape from the place of occurrence. It is further submitted that the driver of the vehicle alleged to have loaded the sand and was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently which was the main cause of the accident. Application of Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code is unwarranted in this case, which is cognizable and non-bailable. There is no involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence and no quantity of sand has been mentioned in the FIR. The vehicle was under the control and management of the driver, who has been arrested in this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also abide by all terms and conditions which

¶13

may be imposed in the matter of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that vehicle of the present petitioner was found illegally transporting 400 cft sand and the driver of the vehicle was driving the vehicle in rash and negligent way and caused an accident resulting into death of three persons. It is submitted that petitioner and driver of the vehicle is responsible for whatever was being transported by the vehicle. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation coupled with materials on record, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Khunti in connection with Torpa P.S. Case No. 32 of 2022 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶16

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶17

R.K

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Kumar Alias Rohit Harijan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Ekram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Boby Sundi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chinta Devi Alias Bacho Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ishwar Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand