Single judge of Jharkhand High Court rejected the applicants prayer for anticipatory bail in a case involving illegal sand mining. The court held the allegation serious and the nature of the crime precluded grant of bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail was 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.
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A No.1073 of 2023
Rajesh Kumar …… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. P. K. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P
--------- 04/Dated: 11th October, 2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the State.
2. Apprehending his arrest, the applicant has approached this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail, in connection with Hanwara P.S. Case No.51 of 2022, registered for the offence under Sections 379/ 411 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of the M.M.D.R Act, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concessions Rules and Rules 9/ 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation & Storage) Rules, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda.
3. Innocence of the applicant has been claimed and undertaking has been given for co-operating with the investigating agency and participation in the trial. It has been submitted that the sand, in question, was being transported by the driver and this applicant being the owner of the tractor, has no concern with the said seized sand. On the above basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that the tractor, in question, has been used in the crime. This applicant is the resident of Bihar while the tractor, loaded with sand, has been seized in the State of Jharkhand. The involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime cannot be ruled out. It has further been submitted that illegal mining of sand has destroyed the resources of Jharkhand and is also causing loss of revenue to the State.
5. Considering the nature of allegation and the materials available on record, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant is, hereby, rejected.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Chandan/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer for anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant apprehending arrest in a minor minerals case involving illegal sand mining.
Whether the applicant's claimed innocence and undertaking to cooperate justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Rajesh Kumar
RAJESH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
