2025:JHHC:19323 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2706 of 2025 ------ Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Singh, aged about 42 years, son of Krishna Singh, Permanent resident of Qtr. No.B-720A, colony Bishanpur, P.O. & P.S.- Bishanpur, Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh). At present resident of Sijua Colony, Near- Durga Mandap, S.S. Q- 184, P.O. & P.S.- Jogta, Dist. Dhanbad (Jharkhand), … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, A.P.P. ----- 04/ 16.07.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajganj P.S. Case No.70/2023, for offences under Sections 414/34 of IPC, Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule, 7/9/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 3. The allegation is that on 30.12.2023 at 9:15 PM, the informant was on patrolling duty along with other police officials. He got a secret informant that some people were storing illegal coal inside the boundary wall of Niwas Tiwary. The informant along with other police officials reached the place of occurrence and found that some people started running away, seeing the police force. 45 tons 2025:JHHC:19323 of coal was found there and the same was seized and seizure list was prepared. 4. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has appeared before the I.O. in compliance of the notice filed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS on 25.01.2024. He submits that thereafter, the police has not issued notice to appear for investigation. 5. The submission of the petitioner clearly suggests that the petitioner does not have any apprehension of being arrested. Admittedly, the petitioner has replied the notice as he appeared pursuant to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNNS and the police has not sought for any warrant. Thus, I am of the opinion that the apprehension of the petitioner is misconceived. The petitioner is thus directed to appear before the Magistrate who will pass an appropriate order taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has complied the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS (which is reflected in paragraph No.8 of this petition) and in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. With the aforesaid observation, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Sandeep. Cp-3