Suryadeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Suryadeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to Suryadeo Yadav and Jitendra Kumar: on arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks, release on bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No. 160 of 2020, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioners Suryadeo Yadav and Jitendra Kumar, apprehending arrest for offences punishable under Sections 379/414/34 IPC, Section 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Rules 7/9(i)/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, are entitled to anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court decided to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks, the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No. 160 of 2020.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted — High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi (A.B.A. No. 1323 of 2024, Order No. 06 dated 15.07.2024, Justice Rajesh Shankar). Petitioners Suryadeo Yadav and Jitendra Kumar, apprehending arrest for offences punishable under Sections 379/414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Rules 7/9(i)/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, are enlarged on anticipatory bail. Counsel submitted the petitioners were unnamed in the F.I.R., which was lodged against coaccused stone-chip firm owners Shatrughan Yadav (M/s. Krishna Stone Chips) and Vimalkant Singh (M/s Radha Krishna Stone Chips), their names allegedly surfacing during investigation; the Spl.P.P. opposed the prayer. On arrest or surrender within three weeks, release on bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions, before Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No. 160 of 2020.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A. No. 1323 of 2024

---

Suryadeo Yadav

Jitendra Kumar … … Petitioners Versus

The State of Jharkhand …. … Opposite Party

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.D. Agarwal, Spl.P.P.

Order No. 06 Dated: 15.07.2024

The petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 379/414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, rule 54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and rules 7/9(i)/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged. The petitioners have not been named in the F.I.R. In fact, the F.I.R. has been lodged against coaccused Shatrughan Yadav-owner of M/s. Krishna Stone Chips and Vimalkant Singh- owner of M/s Radha Krishna Stone Chips. The name of the petitioners allegedly surfaced during the investigation of the case. Except the fact that the petitioners are partners of M/s. Krishna Stone Chips on paper, they are not involved in the present case in any other manner. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph-9 of the present anticipatory bail application. They also undertake to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned Spl.P.P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for

anticipatory bail.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

5. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No. 160 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Ritesh/

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)