Allowed¶18

MD Kamruddin Miyan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Mar 2026A.B.A./999/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail Jharkhand High Court Ranchi; A.B.A. No. 999 of 2026; Md. Kamruddin Miyan; Md. Shamim Miyan; Complaint Case No. 150 of 2017; Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Chatra; Section 33 Indian Forest Act; poppy plants cultivation forest land; forest department land ownership; no criminal antecedents; surrender within two weeks; release on bail on Court-devised terms and sureties; Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi; 09.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed: petitioners directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and, on surrender, to be released on such terms and conditions or sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper. ¶18

MD Kamruddin Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in Complaint Case No. 150 of 2017 for alleged offences under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra.

¶12

Court's answer

This Court considered that the land in question is of the forest department and does not belong to the petitioners, and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents as disclosed in paragraph 14 of the petition.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

On that basis the Court directed the petitioners to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks, and ordered that upon surrender the learned Court shall release them on such terms and conditions or sureties as it may deem fit and proper, i.e., anticipatory-bail protection was accorded.

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.), decision dated 09.03.2026 — Anticipatory Bail Application No. 999 of 2026 allowed. Petitioners Md. Kamruddin Miyan (about 65 years) and Md. Shamim Miyan (about 40 years), residents of village Wami, PO/PS Pratappur, District Chatra, apprehended arrest in Complaint Case No. 150 of 2017 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra, for alleged offences under Sections 33 of the Indian Forest Act (counsel alleged false imputation of poppy cultivation on forest land). Counsel for the petitioners urged that the land was of the forest department and not theirs and that the petitioners had no criminal antecedent (paragraph 14 of the petition); the State opposed. Considering that the land is of the forest department and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, the Court directed the petitioners to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and ordered release on such terms, conditions or sureties as the learned Court deems fit and proper.

¶1

2026:JHHC:6080

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 999 of 2026

¶3

----

¶4

1. Md. Kamruddin Miyan, aged about 65 years, son of Suleman Miyan

¶5

2. Md. Shamim Miyan, aged about 40 years, son of Kamruddin Miyan

¶6

Both are resident of village – Wami, PO and PS – Pratappur, District - Chatra .... Petitioners

¶7

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

¶8

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶10

--For the Petitioners :- Mr. Aditya Banerjee, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate ----

¶11

02 /09.03.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶12

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.150 of 2017, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 33 of Indian Forest Act pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra.

¶13

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that false allegations are made against the petitioners of cultivation of poppy plants on the forest land. He further submits that the land is of the forest department and that is not belonging to the petitioners. He then submits that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.14 of the petition.

¶14

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer

¶15

--1-- A.B.A. No. 999 of 2026

¶16

2026:JHHC:6080

¶17

and submits that the allegations are there of cultivation of poppy plants on the forest land.

¶18

5. Considering that the land is of the forest department and that is not belonging to the petitioners and the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.14 of the petition and in that view of the matter the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and the learned Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶20

Dated 09.03.2026 Sangam/

¶21

--2--

¶22

A.B.A. No. 999 of 2026

MD Kamruddin Miyan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Kamruddin Miyan 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

Lal Mohan Munda Allias Lal Mohan Singh Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Roshan Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Chandan Das Alias Chandan Prasad Vs Ritika Nayan

Rajendra Prasad Jaiswal Alias Chunnu Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand Thru the Anti-Corruption Bureau

Sonu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand