Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 6 docs - [View All]
Section 21 in THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981
Section 411 in The Indian Penal Code
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code
The Registration Act, 1908
Section 21 in The Mines Act, 1952

advertisement
advertisement

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Jharkhand High Court
Sanjay Mehta vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 July, 2013
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             A.B.A. No. 2526 of 2013

Sanjay Mehta                                       ....    Petitioner(s)

                                          Versus
State of Jharkhand                                 ...     Opposite Party

Coram :                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY

For the petitioner (s): Mr. Deepak Kumar
For the opposite party : Addl.P.P.

04.07.2013

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

This is an application for anticipatory bail flied by the petitioner in connection with Ichak PS case No. 188 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code, section 21 of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act,1957; section 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and section 21 of the Pollution & Environment Control Act, 1982.

Present case has been instituted against crusher owners who have not taken 'No Objection Certificate' from Pollution Control Board and other departments and were found running their crushers. It is alleged that stone chips and boulders have also been recovered from the premises of some of the accused persons.

It is submitted that the petitioner was just going to stall crusher for which foundation work was going on. In anticipation that he would run crusher without no objection certificate and he would commit illegal mining, he has been implicated in the case.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Contention made on the learned counsel finds support from the FIR itself.

Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named is directed to appear/surrender before the court below within a period of three weeks positively from the date of this order and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of CJM, Hazaribagh, in connection with Ichak PS case No. 188 of 2012 ( GR No. 4126 of 2012) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Ambastha/-                                                  ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)