Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Dayanand Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Home
Jharkhand HC
2026
Dayanand Mahto Vs the State of JharkhandDayanand Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Allowed¶19

Dayanand Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jun 2026A.B.A./2947/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A.B.A. No. 2947 of 2026; Dayanand Mahto v. The State of Jharkhand; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; decided 09.06.2026; anticipatory bail; apprehension of arrest; Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025; illegal transportation of sand by truck; Sections 303(2) and 317(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; Rule 4/54 Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules 2004; Section 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957; Rule 13 Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules 2017; notice under Section 35(3) BNSS 2023; parity with co-accused (A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025); no criminal antecedent; Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-XXX Ranchi; bail bond Rs. 25,000/-; Section 482(2) BNSS 2023 conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender within three weeks and, on arrest or surrender, to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Why is it important?

The privilege of anticipatory bail is extended to the petitioner because he was not named in the FIR, received notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is neither the owner nor the driver of the truck in question, has no criminal antecedent, and the co-accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench. ¶18

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender within three weeks and, on arrest or surrender, to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025.

Court's answer

The privilege of anticipatory bail is extended to the petitioner because he was not named in the FIR, received notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is neither the owner nor the driver of the truck in question, has no criminal antecedent, and the co-accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks and, in the event of arrest or surrender, shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class-XXX, Ranchi, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025 under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and allied mining-law provisions — petitioner unnamed in FIR, noticed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, neither owner nor driver of the truck allegedly carrying sand, no criminal antecedent, and co-accused already granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025 — privilege of anticipatory bail extended; surrender within three weeks; bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two like sureties; conditions of Section 482(2) BNSS 2023 to apply (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.).

A

[ 2026:JHHC:16489]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2947 of 2026

Dayanand Mahto, aged about 21 years, S/o Sahodar Mahto, R/o Village-Basahatu, Rahe, P.O. B. Nawadih, P.S. Rahe, District Ranchi.

..... … Petitioner Versus

The State of Jharkhand

..... … Opposite Party

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Anmol Deepak, Advocate. For the State : Mr. B. Shastri, A.P.P.

03/ 09.06.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P

for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Rule4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, , Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class-XXX, Ranchi.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the truck in question and it has been alleged that sand was being carried in the said truck. He next submits that some persons have taken the name of this petitioner and thereafter he has received the notice under Section 35(3) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He then submits that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-04 of the petition. He also submits that the other

-1-

[ 2026:JHHC:16489]

co-accused persons have already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025 by the co-ordinate bench.

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that illegally the sand was carried on the said truck.

Considering that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and subsequently the petitioner has received the notice under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and further the petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the truck in question and further the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-04 of the petition and the other co-accused persons have already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of her arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class-XXX, Ranchi, in connection with Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Dated:-09.06.2026 Amitesh/-

-2-

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025.¶12
The court held
The privilege of anticipatory bail is extended to the petitioner because he was not named in the FIR, received notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is neither the owner nor the driver of the truck in question, has no criminal antecedent, and the co-accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench.ratio¶18

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025Relied on¶16

Statutes considered

7 provisions across 5 enactments

AI extract

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023303(2)¶12 317(5)¶12
Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004Rule 4/54¶12
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 19574/21¶12
Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017Rule 13¶12

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Registration of Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025 for offences under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Rule4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017; pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class-XXX, Ranchi.¶12
Prior proceeding
Petitioner, not named in the FIR, received notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after some persons took his name.¶18
Prior proceeding
Co-accused persons were already granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench in A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025.¶16

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Dayanand Mahto¶3
Anmol Deepak
respondent
The State of Jharkhand¶5
B. Shastri

Coram

AI extract

Sanjay Kumar Dwivediauthor¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Jharkhand HC
Decided on: 9 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 3 Jun 2026
Case no.: A.B.A./2947/2026
CNR: JHHC010178152026
Topic: Mining and Natural Resources
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Disposal: Allowed
Case type: A.B.A.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Shambhu Mandal @ Sambhu Mandal @ Shyam Sundar Mandal Vs State of Jharkhand
8 Jun 2026
Dheeraj Kumar @ Dhiraj Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand
8 Jun 2026
Bhola Prasad Alias Bhola Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand
8 Jun 2026
Taj Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand
9 Jun 2026
Sanjay Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand
9 Jun 2026
Rakesh Raj Alias Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand
9 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

Dayanand Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand, A.B.A./2947/2026 (JH), decided on 9 June 2026.

The High Court of Jharkhand publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

A.B.A. No. 2317 of 2025Relied on¶16

Open Authorities

Statutes7

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023303(2) · 317(5)
Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004Rule 4/54
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 19574/21
Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017Rule 13

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Registration of Rahe P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025 for offences under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Rule4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017; pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class-XXX, Ranchi.
Petitioner, not named in the FIR, received notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after some persons took his name.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Parties & counsel

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

35(3)¶13 482(2)¶19