Sajjan Sao @ Sajjan Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Forest Act, 1927 ss. 26(1)(g), 41, 42, 52
- Bihar Amendment Act, 1989
- Wild Life Protection Act, 1972
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 482(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five…
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate 04/10.10.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well ---- as the learned counsel appearing for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.92 of 2024, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 26(1)(g), 41, 42 and 52 of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and Section 27, 29, and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the mica scrap as well as JCB machine which was used in collecting the mining scrap. He further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.15 of the petition. He then submits that only on suspicion the name of the petitioner has come and it has been stated that on the confidential statement of somebody the --1-- A.B.A. No. 5945 of 2025 name of the petitioner has come.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the name of the petitioner has come from the reliable source.
Considering that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.15 of the petition and the mica and JCB machine are not of the petitioner as submitted and the person who has taken the name of the petitioner his name is not disclosed in the FIR, I am inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma in connection with Complaint Case No.92 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 10.10.2025 Sangam/ --2-- A.B.A. No. 5945 of 2025
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Forest Act, 1927 — ss. 26(1)(g), 41, 42, 52; Bihar Amendment Act, 1989; Wild Life Protection Act, 1972; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Jharkhand High Court, on 10 Oct 2025. The bench was SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI.
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.