Mukesh Vishwakarma v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
- Neutral citation
- 2025:JHHC:24003
Outcome
Disposed of
This petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Indian Forest Act, 1927 ss. 26(g), 41, 42
- Bihar Amendment Act, 1989
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. This petition is disposed of. SI/ ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner For the State --- :- Mr. Md.Asghar, Advocate Miss Ishika Tigga, Advocate Mr. P.D. Agagwal, Advocate :- ---- 2/18.08.2025 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.424 of 2021, for offence registered under section 26(g), 41 and 42 of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and section 27,29 and 51 of The Wile Life (Protection ) Act 1972, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Koderma.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complaint case has been filed and the learned court has taken cognizance and issued summons against the petitioners. He submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the mica scrap as well as the vehicle in question and the allegations are made that commander jeep seeing the forest guard started to ran away.
Learned State counsel opposes the prayer and submits that if such allegations are there, the petitioner is required to surrender before the learned court.
In view of above, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within two weeks from today and the learned court shall release the petitioner on such terms and conditions and the sureties as the learned court may deem fit and proper.
Operative part
This petition is disposed of. SI/ ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Forest Act, 1927 — ss. 26(g), 41, 42; Bihar Amendment Act, 1989.
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.