Sodai Mahto @ Sadanand Mahto v. The State of Jharkhand

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA For the Petitioner For the State ------ : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate (In both the cases) : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl.P.P : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Advocate ------ Order No. 06 Dated- 06.07.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Both these cases arise out of the same FIR and taken up together for hearing and disposed of by common order. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Silli P.S. Case No. 72 of 2022 instituted under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Rules 4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Rules 7/11 of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules 2017 and Rules 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail. As per F.I.R. allegation is that during raid conducted on the basis of the direction of SDO, Sadar, Ranchi at Village – Sarjamdih and in course of inspection, it was found that illegal excavation of stones over the government land was done and it is alleged that the petitioners are involved in the illegal mining and storage of stones and sand.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of some confidential information. On earlier occasion also Silli P. S. Case No. 114 of 2020 dated 19.09.2020 was lodged against the petitioners in which after investigation no offence was found against the petitioners and final form was submitted. This fact has also been mentioned in the case diary as such the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. It is further -2- submitted that the petitioners are co-operating in the investigation and complying the notice issued under Section 41(A) CrPC. It is further submitted that petitioners undertake to co-operate with investigation of the case and will not indulge in tampering with prosecution evidence and will abide by all terms and conditions imposed by this Court in the matter of granting anticipatory bail.

Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioners coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Ranchi in connection with Silli P.S. Case No. 72 of 2022 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Umesh/-