Single judge order refusing anticipatory bail to petitioners charged with operating an illegal crusher plant and theft of minor minerals. Directs surrender to secure regular bail at the trial court level.
Anticipatory bail denied; petitioners directed to surrender to Trial Court to claim regular bail.
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. 4083 of 2023
----
… Petitioners
-versus-
The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
----
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State: Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Spl.PP
2/ 19.06.2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for
the State.
Petitioners apprehend their arrest for allegedly committing offence under Sections 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in connection with Panki Police Station Case No.123 of 2022, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamu.
As per the allegations in the First Information Report, several persons, altogether 17 in number, including these petitioners are regularly operating illegal crusher plant in the forest area by committing theft of forest produce, minor minerals. District Mining Officer has claimed to have inquired into the whole matter and has alleged to have conducted raid on all the points mentioning the longitude and latitude of the area and has found the allegations true. Huge quantity of stone chips and boulders were seized from the places and same was given in Zimmenama to local persons. Vide letter No.2785M dated 08.11.2022, present case has been lodged on the written complaint of District Mining Officer. Petitioners have been found indulged in the illegal excavation, storage and transportation of minor minerals belonging to the Forest Department. About 500 Cft. Boulders, 3000 Cft. Stone chips and 500 Cft. Stone dusts were found from the possession of petitioner, Ajay Yadav; about 1700 Cft. Boulders, 2400 Cft. Stone chips and 200 Cft. Stone dusts were found from the possession of the petitioner, Ajay Vishwakarma; about 1200 Cft. Boulders, 3000 Cft. Stone chips and 400 Cft. Stone dusts were found from the possession of petitioner Anuj Singh; and about 500 Cft.
-: 2 :-
Boulders, 2000 Cft. Stone chips were found from the possession of the petitioner Bishnudev Yadav.
Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Petitioners are, accordingly, directed to surrender before the Trial Court and pray for grant of regular bail, which the Trial Court will consider, especially, taking into consideration that the case arises out of a complaint.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners facing charges of unlawful mining under IPC, JMMCR, and MMDR Act.
Whether the apprehension of arrest justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Ajay Yadav, Anuj Singh, Ajay Vishwakarma, Vishnu Dev Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
