Hussaini Sharma v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within three…
Judgment
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : For the State : Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Advocate Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate Ms. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. Order No.05 Date: 15.07.2024 -----
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint (C.F.) Case No.16 of 2024 registered under Section 14 of Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 and Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the offence report. As per the allegation, the petitioner was illegally running a saw mill in village-Sandhya, District-Garhwa.
Reference is made to the order dated 8th July, 2024, whereby learned A.P.P. was directed to seek instruction regarding the criminal antecedent of the petitioner.
Learned A.P.P., on instruction, submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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 1st Class, Nagar Untari at Garhwa in connection with Complaint (C.F.) Case No.16 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. Vikas (Rajesh Shankar, J.) -2-
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Forest Act, 1927 — s. 42; Bihar Amendment Act, 1989; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Jharkhand High Court, on 15 Jul 2024. The bench was RAJESH SHANKAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.