Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30267 (JHR)

RAJU YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./50/2025 · 2025-01-17

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 50 of 2025 ------ 1. Raju Yadav, aged about 53 years, son of Churaman Yadav, resident of village –Paro, P.O. –Sapahi, P.S. –Koderma, District –Koderma 2. Mangaldeo Yadav, aged about 54 years, son of Tulsi Yadav, resident of village –Kolhua Kalan, P.O. & P.S. – Hazaribagh, District –Hazaribagh. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate : Mrs. Pinki Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, Spl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 17.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No.275 of 2024 registered under sections 303(2)/ 317(2)/317(5) of B.N.S., 2023, Section 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Mines Mineral Concession Rule, 2004, Section 21(1)(5) of the Mines and Minerals Act and Section 33/41/42 of the Indian Forest Act. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were the owner of the tractors which were involved in transportation of illegally excavated sand. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-11 of the instant anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Spl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.5,000/- each and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Koderma, in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No.275 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-