Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49198 (CHH)

SARAFAT ALI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/1743/2025 · 2025-11-10

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:54866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1743 of 2025 Sarafat Ali S/o M.D. Salim Aged About 31 Years House No. 406, Ward No. 16, Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Suryapratap Yudhveer Singh, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 11/11/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Criminal Case No. 354/2025, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba, District – Korba for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 4 (1) (A) & 21 (1) & 21 (2) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. 2. The story in brief is such that, on 18.10.2023 at around 03:30 P.M. at village Dumardih, Tehsil – Korba, District – Korba during patrolling, the mining authorities stopped a vehicle bearing registration no. CG 12 AL 6165 and upon investigation, it was found that the applicant was transporting sand which was illegally mined. Upon raising specific query regarding the 2 documents (transit pass) for mining the sand, the applicant and the co- accused person failed to produce any document, upon which, the aforementioned offences were registered against the applicant and the co- accused persons under Sections 4 (1) (A) & 21 (1) & 21 (2) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the case is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba, District – Korba. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant is the owner of the offending vehicle i.e. CG 12 AL 6165 and he is not apprised by the drivers regarding the precise quantity of minerals or other substances which were transported from the offending vehicle. He submits that the applicant was completely oblivious of the illegal mining/transportation of sand by the drivers of the offending vehicle. Offence. He submits that there is no material available against the applicant and the said FIR is registered only to falsely implicate the applicant. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the accused persons were caught red- handed by the mining authorities for illegally transporting the sand without any valid transit pass or any other document. He submits that the case is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and there are ample chances of collecting evidence against the applicant. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the risk of tampering with evidence, and the prima facie material collected, it is submitted that the anticipatory bail application deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, submission of counsel for the respective parties and material on record in the case diary, documents 3 enclosed along with the bail application which clearly amplifies the fact that the applicant is the owner of the offending vehicle as also, it cannot be a case of false implication, offences registered against the applicant are serious in nature, the accused persons were caught red-handed by the authorities while transporting sand illegally, therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Sarafat Ali, involved in Criminal Case No. 354/2025, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba, District – Korba for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 4 (1) (A) & 21 (1) & 21 (2) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, stands rejected. 8. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY