Mahatab Ali vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.259 of 2023, for the offence registered under sections 379/411/34 of the IPC, Rules 4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Section 7/9 of Jharkhand Mineral Prohibition of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage Rules, 2017 and Section 4/21 of Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are made that in the tempo sand was loaded however there is no seizure of any sand. He submits that co-accused has been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.343 of 2024..

Learned State counsel opposed the prayer on the ground that illegally sand was being carried on the said tempo.

Considering that the petitioner is driver cum owner of the tempo in question and the co-accused has been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.343 of 2024, and in the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to provide privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella, in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.259 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.