Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Manish Jain vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party(S) on 17 June, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                                       2025:JHHC:15824
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 A.B.A. No. 3292 of 2025
                                       -----
         Manish Jain, S/o Madan Lal Jain, R/o Kai Bari Road, P.O. Hazaribagh, P.S. Sadar
         Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh                       .... Petitioner(s).
                                               Versus
         The State of Jharkhand                                ... Opp. Party(s).
                                       ......
               CORAM        :    SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohitashya Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Spl. P.P. .........

03/ 17.06.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. This anticipatory ba il application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Surksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences under Sections 30, 33, 41 and 42 of the Forest Act, 1927.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that in the BPLE proceeding it was held that the land on which the factory of the petitioner has been established, is forest land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has got no concern in the present establishment and the basis of lodging the F.I.R. has now become nonest as in the BPLE Appeal, the Deputy Commissioner has set aside the order of the BPLE Court.

5. After hearing the parties, I find that on basis of an order passed in G(F) No.22 of 2019 it was held that the factory in question was on the forest land. The order dated 23.05.2019 was challenged in BPLE No.07 of 2019 before the Deputy Commissioner being the Appellate Authority. Vide order dated 16.11.2002, the said order passed in G.(F) No.22 of 2019, corresponding to BPLE No.09 of 2019 has been set aside.

6. The aforesaid fact has not been denied by the State.

7. Considering the fact that BPLE appeal has been allowed in favour of the petitioner, I feel that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of her surrender or arrest, she shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Complaint Case No.2142 of 2019, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property.

9. Petitioner should appear before the Court concerned and file necessary bonds.

(ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S./