Mintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hansraj, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 20-06-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

The instant application for anticipatory bail has

¶15

been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in a case instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 281, 125(a), 125(b), 132, 109, 324(4), 303(2), 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶16

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on

¶17

22.02.2025, acting on secret information, the Mines Inspector, Nalanda, conducted a raid at Panchane River near villages Barchhi Bigaha and Mohammadpur. During the operation, illegal sand and soil mining activities were

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37177 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 2/3

¶19

detected. As the raiding team approached, the tractor drivers fled, offloading the excavated material. In the course of the chase, the raiding team’s vehicle was deliberately dashed by the offending vehicle.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further submitted that the case has been registered under only Section of BNS Act because nothing has been found upon the tractors. It is further submitted that there is no independent witness of the alleged seizure rather the seizure witnesses are police officials and copy of the seizure has not been served to anyone. Chargesheet has been submitted against the petitoner. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that two constables, namely, Praveen Kumar and Sanjeev Kumar have sustained injuries on his back and right leg, respectively.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37177 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 3/3

¶24

in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Giriyak P.S. Case no. 75 of 2025, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., with following condition:-

¶25

(i) One of the bailors should be close relative/family member of the petitioner.

¶26

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)

¶27

Nirajkrs/-

¶28

U T

Mintu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mintu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Gauri Shankar Rai @ Gauri Shankar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Anant Singh @ Anant Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Golu Mian @ Sarafraj Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Md Zakir Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Guddu @ Md. Haidar Ali Vs The State of Bihar