Back
2022 Supreme(MP) 1201
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J.
Halke Jatav – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 57944 of 2022
Decided On : 08-12-2022
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Application
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.379
MINES AND MINERALS ACT : S.21(1), S.4(1)
Headnote
Bail - Illegal Mining - The court granted bail to the applicant accused of illegal mining of sand, considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial would take time, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for the offence of illegal mining of sand and was found with a tractor trolley filled with sand for which he had no license and had not paid any royalty.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted bail to the applicant, considering the length of custody and the time the trial would take, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Issues: Bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the length of custody and the time the trial would take in granting bail to the applicant, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The application for bail was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to furnish a cash surety and a personal bail bond to be released on bail with conditions.
Tara Chandra Narvaria, Advocate, Naval Kishor Gupta, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed
JUDGMENT
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J. - This is the first application u/S.439 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of bail.
2. The applicant was arrested on 23.11.2022 in connection with Crime No.466/2022 by Police Station- Kolaras District- Shivpuri (MP) for the offence punishable under Sections 379 of IPC and 4(1), 21(1) Mines and Minerals Act, 1957 was registered.
3. I n brief, the prosecution case is that present applicant accused Halke Jatav was found illegally mining of sand. From his possession tractor trolley filled with sand was seized for which he was having no licence and also no royalty was paid for the said material.
4. Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. After investigation charge-sheet has been submitted. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection.
6. Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the fact that applicant is in custody since 23.11.2022 and conclusion of trial will take some time, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that if the applicant furnishes a cash surety of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) alongwith a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one local solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he should be released on bail with condition that if he remains absent during trial, the said security will stand forfeited automatically without notice to the applicant.
7. He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date and will cooperate with the trial. In case of default, the cash security of Rs. 25,000/- shall stand forfeited automatically
8. Application stands allowed and disposed of.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
