Patna High Court
Sanjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to prescribed conditions, as the alleged excess could not be fastened upon him and he has a clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, the owner of a truck, was implicated in an illegal mining raid where 620.01 cubic feet of stone chips were seized, allegedly exceeding the documented 550.00 cubic feet by 70.01 cubic feet. The driver was arrested for not producing transport documents, and the petitioner sought anticipatory bail, claiming no knowledge of the excess and a clean antecedent. The prosecution opposed the bail, but the court noted that the driver was already in custody and the alleged excess could not be directly attributed to the petitioner. Considering the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and his clean record, the court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, subject to strict conditions. The bail order required a bond, sureties, and compliance with conditions such as appearing before the trial court, not tampering with evidence, and refraining from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the truck owner in the absence of direct evidence of his participation in the alleged excess mining.
- Whether the petitioner is liable for the alleged excess quantity of stone chips seized during the raid.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S. are appropriate in the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111, 303(2), 317(2)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal mining
- excess stone chips
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12477 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2025 Thana- NAWADA MUFFASIL District- Nawada
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar Son of Jit Narayan Singh Resident of Village - Marchi, P.S.-
Bipass, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. The Mines Department, Bihar, Patna. Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priyanshu Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dixit, Spl. P.P
Ms. Shruti Singh, Advocate
Mr. Utkarsh Pathak, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Nawada Muffasil P.S. Case No.68 of 2025,
F.I.R dated 21.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 303(2), 317(2) and 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 21.02.2025, the
Mining Inspector informed the S.H.O., Muffasil Police Station,
Nawada, that acting on secret information, a joint raid was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12477 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/4
conducted near Dharmsheela More against illegal mining and
transportation. During the raid, a Hywa truck (Reg. No.
BR04GH-3796) loaded with 620.01 cubic feet of stone chips
was intercepted. The driver, Ranjeet Kumar, failed to produce
valid transport documents. The truck and minerals were seized,
the driver was arrested, and a seizure list was prepared in the
presence of witnesses.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as
per the F.I.R., 620.01 cubic feet of stone chips were found
loaded on the truck in question, whereas according to the
challan, the quantity of stone chips was 550.00 cubic feet,
showing an excess of 70.01 cubic feet. It is contended that the
petitioner, being the owner of the truck, had no knowledge of
the alleged excess quantity. It is the case of the petitioner that
the driver has already been arrested from the spot for not
producing the challan while the challan was with the permanent
driver and there is no independent witness to the said occurrence
and even the persons, who are witnesses to the seizure are the
members of the raiding team. Lastly, it has been submitted that
the petitioners have clean antecedent and are ready to co-operate
with the investigation.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12477 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/4
anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the driver has already been taken into judicial custody and
there is only allegation of there being 70.01 cubic feet excess
stone chips, the liability of which cannot be fastened upon this
petitioner and the petitioner has clean antecedent. Accordingly,
this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-I, Nawada, in connection
with Nawada Muffasil P.S. Case No.68 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12477 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
4/4
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
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.