Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14568 (JHR)

SEVEN KUMAR PANDEY ALIAS SEWANI KUMAR PANDEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2860/2025 · 2025-05-27

Rajesh Shankar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:14234 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2860 of 2025 ----- 1. Seven Kumar Pandey @ Sewani Kumar Pandey son of Kanchan Pandey resident of village Naudha, Post Office – Amjhar, Police Station Mayurhand, District-Chatra. 2. Santosh Kumar Mehta son of Indeshwar Mahto resident of village Soki, Post Office-Amjhar, Police Station Mayurhand, District-Chatra. .......... Petitioners. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand .......... Opp. Party. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, APP ----- Order No.02 Date: 27.05.2025 1. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 303(2), 317(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Rules 4 and 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004; Sections 4 and 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957; and Rules 7, 9 & 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioners have no concern with the sand allegedly recovered from the bank of Soki River. They have been implicated in this case merely on the hearsay statements of the villagers. Except that there is no other evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged offence. Though the petitioners have criminal 2025:JHHC:14234 antecedents, however, so far as the present case is concerned, they have been implicated in the same without any cogent evidence. They, however, undertakes to co-operate in ongoing investigation of the case. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, in event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today, shall be released 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 Judicial Magistrate, Chatra, in connection with Mayurhand P.S. Case No.06 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Rohit/ -2- A.B.A. No.2860 of 2025