Allowed

Sudev Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Jun 2023A.B.A./1390/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted an anticipatory bail application filed by two petitioners in connection with a case registered under Sections 379 and 353 IPC and relevant mining regulations. The bail was subject to sureties and a specific deposit amount.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed subject to deposit of Rs.5,000 by each petitioner and furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties each.

Sudev Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A. B. A. No. 1390 of 2023

¶3

1.Sudev Mahato 2.Pramod Kumar Mishra. .... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand. .. ... ...Opp. Party(s)

¶4

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioners : M/s Akansha Anil, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, APP

¶6

04/ 15.06.2023 . Apprehending their arrest, petitioners above-named have moved this Court

¶7

for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Jorapokhar P.S. Case No.180 of 2022 registered under Sections 379, 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 21 of Mines and Minerals Development Regulation Act, 1957, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 and Rule 9, 13 of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017.

¶8

Heard the parties.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that Section 353 IPC will not be made out as no overt act and specific act has been attributed to the petitioners. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 is the driver of the vehicle whereas petitioner no.2 is the owner. The co-accused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

¶10

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the fact as discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner named above shall be released on bail on depositing cash of Rs.5,000/- by each petitioner and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

¶12

The petitioners will co-operate in the investigation and will appear on notice under Section 41 A of Cr.P.C. as and when his presence is required.

¶13

Sandeep/ uploaded .

Sudev Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudev Mahato 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

Preetam Kumar Alias Pritam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vijay Rai Alias Vijay Kumar Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chuttu Lal Singh Alias Chhutu Lal Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Majud Alias Sukhal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ujjwal Mistry Alias Rup Kumar Mistry Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santu Kumar Yadav Alias Shantu Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand