Allowed

Birendra Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Mar 2023Cr.A(DB)/120/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed a criminal appeal and quashed an order denying pre-arrest bail to the appellant. The court granted bail subject to conditions, directing the appellant's surrender and requiring State authorities to follow NIA Act mandates.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 03.01.2023 quashed; pre-arrest bail granted; direction to surrender within one week post-Holi.

Birendra Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.120 of 2023

¶3

------

¶4

Birendra Saw …. …. Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

National Investigating Agency (NIA)

¶8

.... .... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶10

------ For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P. For the N.I.A. : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate

¶11

------

¶12

06/Dated: 02.03.2023 Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

¶13

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 for pre-arrest bail in connection with Shikaripara P.S. Case No.147 of 2022 by which the allegation has been leveled under Section 9B of the Explosive Act, 1884 and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dumka.

¶14

2. The ground has been taken for consideration to release him on bail anticipating his arrest that although, the license to run the mines has been allotted in his favour by virtue of lease license issued by the competent authority but he has transferred the same in favour of one Ram Kishore Prasad and as such, the allegation has been leveled that it is not applicable to the appellant, since, he is not at all involved in the operation of the aforesaid mining lease.

¶15

3. This Court, while hearing the learned counsel for the parties on 28.02.2023 has called upon Superintendent of Police, Dumka in order to

¶16

¶17

interact as to why the steps be not taken up in the light of the provision of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the N.I.A. Act, 2008.

¶18

4. Mr. Amber Lakra, at present working as Superintendent of Police, Dumka is present along with the case diary.

¶19

5. Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned APP appearing for the State by referring to the case diary has submitted that the culpability which has been found by the Investigating Agency pertaining to the appellant is that even though, the license has been issued by the competent authority in his favour but the license is still in his name, as such, he cannot be escaped from his liability if any illegal means are happening in the premises in question.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. on the basis of the aforesaid submission has opposed the prayer made in the instant application for release of the appellant apprehending his arrest.

¶21

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and after appreciating the same, it transpires that the fact about transfer of lease although cannot be said to be illegal transfer but it has been admitted by the State that the lease has been transferred by virtue of agreement entered with one Raj Kishore Prasad and as such, the fact about operating the said mining lease even has been agitated by the State, since, the document has been placed for its perusal to this Court as contained in memo no.483/Shikaripara dated 20.02.2023 which has been kept on record. From its perusal it also appears that the fact about the transfer of the lease has been admitted and the lease was transferred in favour of one Raj Kishore Prasad.

¶22

7. The question of illegality of transfer of lease is not the subject matter of the instant application, however, it is available to the State to

¶23

¶24

appropriate action on the ground of illegal transfer of the said lease if the transfer is found contrary to the applicable Mining Rules. But herein, the question of culpability of the appellant is to be considered since the appellant is seeking bail in anticipation of his arrest.

¶25

8. This Court, taking into consideration the fact that there is general and omnibus allegation against the appellant and as such, inclined to interfere with the order dated 03.01.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Dumka in A.B.P. No.511 of 2022. 9. Accordingly, order dated 03.01.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Dumka in A.B.P. No.511 of 2022, is hereby quashed and set aside. 10. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

¶26

11. On consideration of the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the appellant. The appellant, accordingly, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within a period of one week after Holi Holidays and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dumka in connection with Shikaripara P.S. Case No.147 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

12. So far as the other issue regarding the follow up action pertaining to the case if instituted under the Scheduled Offences, the Superintendent of Police, Dumka, will take necessary endeavour by issuing SoP communicating to the Officer In-charge falling under its jurisdiction so that the mandate of N.I.A. Act will strictly be followed.

¶28

¶29

13. Personal appearance of Mr. Amber Lakra, Superintendent of Police

¶30

Dumka, is dispensed with.

¶31

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶32

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶33

Rohit/-

Birendra Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Saw 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

Sita Ram Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Home

Abraham Tuti Vs the Union of India through Nia

Poonam Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Radhe Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Topno Kandulna Alias Dupan Alias Dupan Kandulna Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajay Turi Vs the State of Jharkhand