Jharkhand High Court
Akhtar Hussain vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 26 February, 2019
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 8092 of 2018
Akhtar Hussain ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. R. R. S. Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party : Addl. P.P.
04 / 26.02.2019Apprehending his arrest, the sole petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Sector 12 P.S. Case No. 50 of 2016 (G. R. No. 955 of 2016 ) registered under Sections 467/468/471/120B/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 33 of Indian Forest Act.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. PP for the State.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner has executed power of attorney in favour of the co-accused in respect of forest land situated at Mouza- Tetulia khata no. 38, Khata No. 59, plot No. 426 /450 area 103 acres and power of attorney holders have sold the said land to the co-accused persons. Drawing attention of the court to page 15 and 16 of the brief, which is the English translated copy of the Certificate of Sale, which translation has been accepted to be true by learned Addl. PP, wherein it has been mentioned that Sri Samir Mahato son of Sri Bhuvan Mahato religion -Mohammedan purchased the plots of land mentioned therein including the land which has been mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel drew further attention of the court to the supplementary affidavit and submitted that the notification regarding declaring land in question as protected forest itself contains an averment that "nature and extent of the rights of the Government and of private persons in or over the forest land and waste lands comprised in this notification have not yet been enquired into and recorded as laid down in sub-section (3) of section 20 of the said Act (Indian Forest Act, 1927) but as the State Government thinks that such enquiry and record will occupy such length of time as in the meantime to endanger the rights of the Government and as the enquiry and record of rights will hereafter be made this notification is issued to subject to all existing rights of individuals or community. "
It was further submitted that the co-accused has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.09.2017 passed in ABA No. 3162 of 2017. Hence, the petitioner may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
The learned Addl. PP opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of his arrest by the police or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, he 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Bokaro in connection with Sector 12 P.S. Case No. 50 of 2016 (G. R. No. 955 of 2016 ) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Animesh/-