Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15008 (JHR)

MUNESHWAR YADAV v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2903/2025 · 2025-05-29

Rajesh Shankar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:14274 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2903 of 2025 1. Muneshwar Yadav, son of Ramvilash Yadav, resident of Village- Babupur, P.O. & P.S. - Eshipur, District- Bhagalpur (Bihar) 2. Manish Yadav, son of Awadhesh Yadav, resident of Village- Nunajor, P.O.- Nunajor, P.S.- Mahagama, District- Godda … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand …. … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. Order No. 02 Dated: 29.05.2025 The petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences punishable under rules 4/54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Sections 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 and rules 9/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. 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 petitioner no. 1 is the owner and the petitioner no. 2 is the driver of truck (Mini Hywa) bearing registration no. JH-15AA-6179 from which there is alleged recovery of about 400 cft. illegal sand. In fact, there has been no such recovery from the said vehicle. The false implication of the petitioners would be evident from the fact that the seizure list prepared in this regard does not bear signature of any independent witness. The petitioners have no 2 criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph-10 of the present anticipatory bail application. They, however, undertake to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned P.P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, in the 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, Godda in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 28 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.)