Single judge bench dismissed this bail application regarding illegal mining charges. The court found that the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner precluded any ground for anticipatory bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 647/2019
Kanshiram S/o Gangaram, R/o Khairabad, Police Station Ramganjmandi, Distt. Kota.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Sharma Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Gurjar, P.P.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Judgment
19/01/2019
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No. 227/2018 registered at Police Station Chechat, District Kota for offence under Sections 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation Act, 1957 and Section 379 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Heard.
Present case relates to illegal mining of minerals. Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle-in-question.
Keeping in view the seriousness of allegations levelled against the petitioner, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to him is made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA)J.
S.Kumawat-56
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail is maintainable under Section 438 CrPC in illegal mining case given seriousness of allegations?
Whether the petitioner as vehicle owner has a ground for grant of anticipatory bail in case of illegal mining?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Kanshiram S/o Gangaram
State Of Rajasthan
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
