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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender before the concerned Court below within three weeks and, on surrender, be released on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 414/34 IPC, Sections 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4/54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act, should be granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Single Judge decided to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was directed to surrender before the concerned Court below within three weeks and, on surrender, to be released on bail on furnishing a bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted (A.B.A. No. 5406 of 2024, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, Rajesh Shankar, J., decided 02.09.2024): Ghanshyam Yadav, apprehending arrest in Rikhiya P.S. Case No. 100/2024 (Deoghar) registered under Sections 414/34 IPC, Sections 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4/54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act over alleged recovery of illegal sand from the tractor of which he is owner-cum-driver, was directed to surrender before the Court below within three weeks and to be released on a bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A. B. A. No. 5406 of 2024

Ghanshyam Yadav ….. Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Party ----- CORAM

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner: Mr. Ankit Kumar For the State: Mr. P. K. Chatterjee, Spl. P.P

03/02.09.2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 414/34 IPC, Sections 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Section 15 of Environment Protection Act has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He is the owner-cum-driver of the tractor bearing Chassis no. EZJSK1338816S3, Engine no. 3100FLU34G1325485F18 from which there is alleged recovery of illegal sand. Though the alleged occurrence took place on 22.06.2024, however, the FIR was lodged on 25.06.2024 without giving any cogent explanation for committing such delay. In fact, the seizure list was not prepared at the place of occurrence, rather the same was prepared in the concerned police station. However, when the petitioner applied for the certified copy of the FIR, it surfaced that the seizure list was not made part of the same. The said fact itself suggests false implication of the petitioner in the present case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph 10 of the present anticipatory bail application. He however undertakes to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, he may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Spl. P.P opposes the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the concerned Court below within a period of three weeks. If he surrenders before the Court below within the aforesaid period, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Deoghar in connection with Rikhiya P.S. Case No. 100/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

Satish/-