High CourtsSingle Bench

Ram Mohan Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 1 November 2022 · Citation: (2022) 11 JH CK 0033

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention Of Illegal Mining Transportation And Storage Act), 1957 — Rule 9, 13 · Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention Of Illegal Mining, Transportation And Storage) Act, 2017 — Section 4, 54 · Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957 — Section 4, 21 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 414, 379 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 7915 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 423 words

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 93 of 2022 instituted under Sections 379/414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 4/21 of M.M.R.D. Act & 4/54 J.M.M.C. Rules & 9/13 the Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention of illegal Mining Transportation & Storage Act), the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

As per F.I.R., upon raid conducted by the informant near the power grid and found out that a crusher was being operated, and around 2000 cft. stone chips and 1000 cft. boulders of different sizes were recovered and seized. It is alleged that upon seeing the police vehicle, two persons fled away towards the jungle. Upon enquiry from the neighbouring villagers they came to know that the said crusher belonged to Ram Mohan Prasad (Petitioner) and the same was being operated by the co-accused Anup Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case due to village politics. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Nothing has been recovered from his possession. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also abide by all terms and conditions which may be imposed in the matter of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation coupled with materials on record, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribag in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 93 of 2022 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.