Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 69033 (PAT)

Rubi Devi v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./57485/2025 · 2025-09-02

Prabhat Kumar Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57485 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- FOREST (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL) District- Munger ====================================================== 1. Rubi Devi W/o Mantu Yadav R/o Village- Paharpur Abgil Hasimpur, P.S. and Distt.- Lakhisarai 2. Sunil Kumar S/o Ramji Yadav @ Ram Yadav R/o vill - Singhchak, P.S- Kiul, Distt.- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 02-09-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 33(b), 41, 42 and 52 of the Indian Forest Act and Sections 17A, 27, 29 and 32 of the Indian Wild Life Protection Act. 3. As per prosecution case, it is suspected that these petitioners are drivers of the seized tractor which was loaded with illegally mined bolder (stones). 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57485 of 2025(2) dt.02-09-2025 2/3 behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, Petitioner No. 1 is registered owner of the tractor in question and Petitioner No. 2 is manager of Petitioner No. 1 and they have got no concern with the seized bolder. The tractor in question was hired by one of the co-villager and without the knowledge and consent of the petitioners, the vehicle was being used for transportation of bolder. Petitioners claim clean antecedents. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and clean antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed. 7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Complaint Case No. 8c2 of 2024, subject to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57485 of 2025(2) dt.02-09-2025 3/3 condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.. shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T