Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Umesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. illegal mining fir; petitioners claim political vendetta (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposing arguments on mining legality and bail (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. anticipatory bail extraordinary, exercised sparingly (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. prima facie continued mining despite suspension (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. illegal mining causes environmental degradation (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. no pre-arrest bail for illegal mining (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. influential petitioner may tamper or reoffend (Para 21 , 22) |
| 8. custodial interrogation essential for investigation (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 9. petitions dismissed; limited to bail disposal (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioners have filed the present petitions for seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 53/25 dated 12.08.2025 registered under Sections 303(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 238, 49 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 and Sections 21 and 22 of Mines and Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, (Mining Act) 1957 at Police Station Sujanpur, District Hamirpur, H.P.
2. It has been asserted that a rukka was received in the police station regarding the illegal mining of stones and gravel in the Pung Khad by Mahavir Stone Crusher, owne
Anticipatory bail denied in illegal mining case despite suspended lease and political vendetta claims, emphasizing environmental harm, prima facie evidence from verified footage, need for custodial i....
The court emphasized that bail should be granted unless justified by circumstances indicating a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence, balancing the accused's liberty with the integrity of the t....
Special laws may coexist with general laws; prosecutions under distinct statutes are permissible if offenses differ under their respective provisions.
The subsequent FIR covered different incidents and wider scope than the earlier FIR, and the petitioners failed to establish political vendetta.
Anticipatory bail should only be granted in exceptional cases, considering serious allegations, potential for witness tampering, and necessity for custodial interrogation.
Pre-arrest bail denied due to prima facie links via CCTV, vehicle, call records; criminal antecedents with multiple prior similar FIRs; need for custodial interrogation; non-disclosure of history; by....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
