Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 284 (JHR)

Binod Bouri v. State of Jharkhand

2014-02-20

R.BANUMATHI

body2014
Order Petitioners are represented by learned counsel, Mr. A.K. Sahani and the opposite party-State is represented by Mr. P.K. Choudhary, A.P.P. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Chandankyari P.S. Case No. 105 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 1232 of 2012 under Sections 414, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of Shri Arjun Saw, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro. 4. It is the case of the prosecution that on 19.7.2012, the officer-in-charge of Chandankyari police station got secret information of illegal mining of coal which is going on at Sita Naala by some agents who sell the said coal to other persons who carrying away the coal by bicycle. On such information, officer-incharge of the said police station along with police party conducted raid in different places at Bogula and Sita Naala (under the Chandankyari police station) and arrested three persons namely Bhim Das, Radhu Das and Gopal Mahatha and these persons were found to be transporting 2.2. quintal of coal in three bi-cycles. On interrogation, these arrested persons had disclosed the name of the persons involved in the illegal mining of the coal and sending it to the depots in Bengal including the name of the depot holders and purchasers of the said coal in Bengal. It was further disclosed that the petitioners and other persons were the agents of the depot holders, who used to provide their help and cooperation to the persons carrying away the coal by their cycles and in committing the crime. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that except the statements of three persons arrested, there is no evidence against the petitioners. It is further submitted that three persons arrested on the spot have already been granted regular bail. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted against three persons who were arrested in this connection. He further submitted that looking to the gravity of the offence, the petitioners are not entitled to privilege of anticipatory bail. 7. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted against three persons who were arrested in this connection. He further submitted that looking to the gravity of the offence, the petitioners are not entitled to privilege of anticipatory bail. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that three arrested persons namely Bhim Das, Radhu Das and Gopal Mahatha have been granted regular bail and charge-sheet has already been submitted against them and except the statements of those arrested persons, there is no other material in the F.I.R. implicating these petitioners, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of Shri Arjun Saw, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with Chandankyari P.S. Case No. 105 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 1232 of 2012 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. Bail granted.