Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24096 (JHR)

KANHAY YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./4972/2025 · 2025-09-01

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:26368 --1-- A.B.A. No. 4972 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4972 of 2025 ---- 1. Kanhay Yadav, aged about 48 years, son of Bhagirath Yadav, resident of village – Inderwa, PO – Indarwa, PS and District – Koderma 2. Chetlal Saw, aged about 47 years, son of Late Mohan Saw, resident of village and PO – Lokai, PS and District – Koderma 3. Rajendra Mandal @ Rajendra Kr. Mandal, aged about 51 years, son of Siwan Saw, resident of village and PO – Nagarkhara, PS and District - Koderma .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate ---- 02/01.09.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.265 of 2024 for the alleged offences registered under Section 26(1)(g) of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and Sections 27, 29 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that false allegations have been made against the petitioners of mining the blue stone. He submits that the allegations are made that the 2025:JHHC:26368 --2-- A.B.A. No. 4972 of 2025 petitioner was identified while he was fleeing from the spot where the excavation of chips were made. He further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent, however, after lodging of the present case another complaint case has been lodged against the petitioner by the forest department. He submits that one of the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail in ABA No.4079 of 2025. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner was identified while he was fleeing from the spot. 5. In view of the above and considering that one of the co- accused has been granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid ABA and further considering that another complaint case has been lodged against the petitioner in that view of the matter the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and the learned Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Sangam/