Jharkhand High Court
A.B.A./5501/2026 of SURESH MEHTA @ SURESH KUMAR MEHTA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 30 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.5501 of 2026 ------ Suresh Mehta @ Suresh Kumar Mehta, aged about 38 years, son of Pradip Mehta, resident of village-Tetariadih, P.O.-Domchanch Bazar, P.S.-Domchanch, District-Koderma. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
( 2026:JHHC:29479 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.5501 of 2026
------ Suresh Mehta @ Suresh Kumar Mehta, aged about 38 years, son of Pradip Mehta, resident of village-Tetariadih, P.O.-Domchanch Bazar, P.S.-Domchanch, District-Koderma.
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Pinki Kumari, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 30-09-2026
Heard the parties.
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.3877 of 2025 registered under sections 26(1)(g), 41, 42 & 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and Sections 27, 29, 31 & 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.
The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transportation of illegally extracted mica scrap from forest area. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that admittedly, the petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of secret information and it has not been disclosed how the complainant could know that the petitioner is involved in the transportation of mica scrap nor it has been mentioned as to who is the person who disclosed to the complainant that the petitioner is involved in transportation of illegally extracted mica scrap. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Spl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.5,000/- and 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 J.M.-1st Class, Koderma, in connection with Complaint Case No.3877 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 30/09/2026 Abhiraj/