Patna High Court
Ram Pravesh Mandal @ Banthu MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, finding no sufficient ground to deny bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Pravesh Mandal, sought bail fearing arrest in a case involving alleged illegal removal of stone chips from a forest, charged under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The FIR described a seized tractor allegedly owned by the petitioner, though the driver fled and was later taken into custody. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserting that the stone chips were not loaded on his tractor and that he was implicated merely on suspicion, while also offering an undertaking to refrain from future offences. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, noting that the driver was already in custody and considering the petitioner's undertaking, granted bail subject to a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case involving alleged offences under the Indian Forest Act and the Wildlife Protection Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement, based on suspicion, justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (or related) Statute (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Indian Forest Act, 1927 — s. 26, 33, 41, 42
- Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — s. 17A, 27, 29, 32
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Forest Act
- Wildlife Protection Act
- Section 482
- suspicion
- arrest
- forest offences
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10242 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2023 Thana- FOREST (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
District- Munger
======================================================
Ram Pravesh Mandal @ Banthu Mandal S/o Sulen Mandal R/o Village-
Ramsir, PS- Kiul, Distt.- Lakhisarai, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabi Bhushan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Madhuri Lata
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Case No.35C2/2023, registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 26, 33, 41, 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and
17A, 27, 29 and 32 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
3. As per the FIR, the patrolling party noticed a
tractor plying on the road. On seeing the police party, the driver
of the tractor managed to escape, leaving the vehicle behind.
The tractor was allegedly loaded with stone chips illegally
brought from the forest area. The said tractor was seized, and
local people disclosed the name of the petitioner as its owner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. He further submits that the stone chips were lying on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10242 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/3
ground and were not found loaded on the tractor belonging to
the petitioner, which is evident from the seizure list prepared by
the Forest Department, appended as Annexure-P/1. It is
contended that the petitioner has been made an accused merely
on suspicion. The driver of the tractor, who was plying the
same, has already been taken into judicial custody. He further
submits that the petitioner undertakes to ensure that no such
allegation is levelled against him in the future, and if upon
verification the allegations are found to be true, liberty may be
reserved to the State officials to take steps for cancellation of the
bail bonds. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has three
criminal antecedents of a similar nature.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State
has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Taking into account that the driver has already
been taken into judicial custody and considering the undertaking
given by the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, be
released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai/ Successor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10242 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/3
Court in connection with Case No.35C2 of 2023 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as
well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
official document/ personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
similar criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.