Dilip Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3953 of 2024

Dilip Munda	… Petitioner Versus
The State of Jharkhand	… Opposite Party -------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR	. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------
For the Petitioner	: Ms. Kismanti Minj, Advocate
For the State	: Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P.
	--------
Heard learned c	ounsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and

¶3

5/11.07.2024

¶4

learned A. P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶5

This anticipatory bail application has been preferred by the petitioner, who is accused and apprehending his arrest in connection with Senha P.S. Case No.64 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.49 of 2023, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concession Rule, 2004 and under Sections 7/13 of Jharkhand Mines and Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017.

¶6

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegations as set out in the FIR is that the tractor of the co-accused Naimun Bhagat was alleged to have been seized for the illegal transportation of sand about 70 CFT and this petitioner is said to be the driver of the said tractor.

¶7

It has been submitted that the co-accused Naimun Bhagat, who was the owner of the tractor, which is said to have been seized along with illegally transportation of sand unlawfully, has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in ABA No. 8905 of 2022 vide order dated 25.01.2023.

¶8

Further it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that this petitioner has no criminal history as stated in para-16 of this anticipatory bail application and accordingly submitted that the petitioner deserves to

¶9

2

¶10

ABA No.3953 of 2024

¶11

get the anticipatory bail.

¶12

On the other hand, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that this petitioner is the main culprit being the driver of the tractor, in which alleged 70 CFT sand was transported unlawfully and therefore petitioner does not deserve to get the anticipatory bail.

¶13

Having heard the parties, perused the record of this case.

¶14

In the light of the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is found just and fair to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, the petitioner above named is directed to surrender within 10 days from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, he is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No.64 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.49 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with further subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate in the investigation and will appear before the I.O. and the learned court below as and when required by them, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned court below for the cancellation of bail as per the provisions of law.

¶16

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶17

R.Kumar

Dilip Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Tiwari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Panbabu Kewat Vs the State of Jharkhand

Saharabhanu Khatoon Alias Saharbano Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Safique Mian Alias MD Safique Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Chandra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Congress Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand