Munna Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Munna Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to all three petitioners in Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, subject to surrender within two weeks and, on arrest or surrender, enlargement on bail on bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two like sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, apprehending arrest in Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026 (offences under Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 and Jharkhand mineral rules), are entitled to anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted: the villagers who took the petitioners' names are not disclosed in the FIR, the land does not belong to the petitioners, the petitioners' ownership of the sand is denied, and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 10 of the petition.

Ratio / Principle

Petitioners directed to surrender within two weeks; on arrest or surrender they are to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla, in Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory Bail — A.B.A. No. 3701 of 2026 (2026:JHHC:20286) — Petitioners apprehending arrest in Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, registered for offences under Sections 303(2), 317(5) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4 and 54 of Jharkhand Minor and Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 and Rules 7 and 9 of Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017 — allegations of storing 7000 CFT sand — villagers said to have named the petitioners not disclosed in FIR; land not belonging to petitioners; ownership of sand denied; no criminal antecedent — anticipatory bail granted on surrender within two weeks, on bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two like sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

2026:JHHC:20286

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A. No. 3701 of 2026

------

Munna Sahu, aged about 32 years, son of Dukhan Sahu, resident of Village Khambiya Kumbatoli, P.O. and P.S. Ghaghra, District Gumla (Jharkhand)

Atwa Oraon @ Etwa Oraon, aged about 31 years, son of Desha Oraon, resident of Village Khambiya Bachhwatoli, P.O. and P.S. Ghaghra, District Gumla (Jharkhand)

Sanjay Bhagat @ Sanjay Oraon, aged about 29 years, son of Bokha Bhagat, resident of Village Khambiya Bachhwatoli, P.O. and P.S. Ghaghra, District Gumla (Jharkhand)

.... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioners : Ms. Rashika Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.

------

02/09.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 303(2), 317(5) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4 and 54 of Jharkhand Minor and Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 and Rules 7 and 9 of Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Gumla.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the name of the petitioners have come only on suspicion and the allegations are made of storing 7000 CFT sand on the particular land. She submits that even the sand is not belonging to the petitioners and the land is also not of the petitioners. She also submits that the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 10 of the petition.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the villagers have taken the name of the petitioners and in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.

2026:JHHC:20286

Considering that the name of the villagers, who have taken the name of the petitioners, are not disclosed in the FIR, further the land is not belonging to the petitioners as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners and even the sand is of the petitioners, has been denied and the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 10 of the petition, in the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within two weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Gumla, in connection with Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

Dated 09.07.2026 Anit

Uploaded 13.07.2026