Jharkhand High Court
A.B.A./5218/2026 of RATAN LAL MAHATO Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 21 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5218 of 2026 ------ Ratan Lal Mahato, aged about 55 years, son of Late Dhaniram Mahato, resident of Village Sundar Kanali, Barakhursi, P.O. and P.S. Galudih, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand
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:28486 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 5218 of 2026
------ Ratan Lal Mahato, aged about 55 years, son of Late Dhaniram Mahato, resident of Village Sundar Kanali, Barakhursi, P.O. and P.S. Galudih, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioner
: Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agarwal, A.P.P.
------
02/21.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Galudih P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rule 54 of Jharkhand Minor and Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 and Rule 13 of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017 pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ghatshila.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case alleging that the petitioner has admitted regarding storing the sand on a particular place. He submits that the said place is a public place where it is alleged that 1500 cft and 2000 cft sand were stored. He next submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the said stored sand and the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 12 of the petition. He further submits that the petitioner is not claiming the said sand and the Circle Officer has only stated that the petitioner has stored the sand. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of storing 1500 cft and 2000 cft sand 2026:JHHC:28486 respectively near the village Sundarkanali and in view of that prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.
5. Considering that the said place is said to be a public place and the petitioner has denied about the storing of sand on the said place and it has also been pointed out that the petitioner is not claiming the said sand and further the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 12 of the petition, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ghatshila, in connection with Galudih P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Dated 21.09.2026 Anit
Uploaded 28.09.2026