Ranjit Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 20 December, 2018

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Ranjit Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 20 December, 2018

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 PAT 2153

Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  Criminal Miscellaneous No.64663 of 2018

   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2018 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Ranjit Kumar, Son of Ram Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Keshopur, P.S.-
Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad (BIHAR).

                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                     Versus
The State of Bihar.

                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
        AMANULLAH
                   ORAL JUDGMENT
 Date : 20-12-2018

             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

A.P.P. for the State.

             2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Barun P.S. Case

No. 145 of 2018 dated 19.07.2018 instituted under Sections

379/411/420/34

of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4/40 of the Bihar Mines and Minerals Concession Rules, 1972 and Section 15 of the Prevention of Pollution Act, 1986.

3. The allegation against the petitioner and five others is of illegal mining of sand and that on seeing the police, they have run away leaving behind the tractor and trailer, which was loaded with sand.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no mentioning as to from which Ghat the tractor and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.64663 of 2018 dt.20-12-2018 2/2 trailer were seized with sand and further, the petitioner was not present when the said seizure list has been made. Learned counsel further submitted that all the rest co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Benches.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State submitted that the petitioner is the owner cum driver of the tractor and trailer, which was caught with sand and, thus, he was involved in illegal mining. It was submitted that violation of environment laws and illegal mining is a serious threat to the nature and in fact, it is not in public interest that such persons be shown any indulgence as such acts tend to damage the environment which as it is has undergone serious depletion.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court