The single judge heard an anticipatory bail application filed by Gayasuddin Sk. accused of illegal mining. The High Court held that the applicant's ownership of seized compressors made him a fit case for arrest and rejected the bail plea.
Anticipatory bail application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4994 of 2022
Gayasuddin Sk. @ Giyasuddin Sk. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -------For the Petitioner : Mr. Indu Shekhar Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P. --------
04/ 22.07.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Pakur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 22 of 2022, registered under Sections 4 and 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (JMMC), Rule and under Section 4 and 21 of the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) (MMDR) Act, pending in the court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pakur.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that, as per F.I.R. allegations, informant-District Mining Officer, Pakur along with S.D.P.O., Pakur had conducted raid and found illegal mining in the mining area earlier sanctioned in the name of Jamirul Haque situated at village-Kalidaspur. Having seen the police party, the labours and munsi, who were involved in illegal mining, managed to flee away. Two Tractor mounted Compressor Machines bearing registration No. JH17G/9429 and JH17A/3567 were seized at the spot and it was verified that illegal mining work was being done by Jamirul Haque and Md. Arsad Sk.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Though Tractor mounted Compressor Machine showed at Sl. No.4 in the F.I.R. belonged to the applicant yet he was not aware that the same was involved in illegal mining.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that admittedly Two Tractor mounted Compressor Machines which were being used in illegal mining belonged to the applicant and the applicant was very well aware in regard to illegal mining and it cannot be accepted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.
In view of the submissions made and the materials on record, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
P.K.S.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in connection with illegal mining charges under the MMDR Act and JMMC Rules.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gayasuddin Sk. @ Giyasuddin Sk.
The State of Jharkhand
SUBHASH CHAND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
