Patna High Court
Muklesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Muklesh Rai and Biresh Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS Case No. 235 of 2024) under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the BNS, 2023, relating to alleged illegal sand mining. They argued they have clean antecedents and were falsely implicated, asserting that the sand was being transported under a valid challan for 22.87 metric tons, whereas 50.15 metric tons were seized. The State contended that the challan was issued to a construction firm for a lesser quantity and that the excess sand constituted illegal mining of a minor mineral under Section 2(e) of the MMDR Act, harming the environment. After hearing both sides, the Court found the State's submissions persuasive and declined to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the BNS, 2023 in view of the alleged illegal sand mining.
- Whether the discrepancy between the challan quantity and the seized sand amount establishes a prima facie case of offence under the MMDR Act.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 303(2), 317(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal sand mining
- environmental law
- minor mineral
- BNS Act
- MMDR Act
- false implication
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79580 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2024 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Muklesh Rai S/O Birendra Rai R/O Village- Singahi, P.S.- Doriganj, Dist.-
Saran at Chapra
2. Biresh Kumar Yadav S/O Gobardhan Yadav R/O Village- Singahi, P.S.-
Doriganj, Dist.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Jalalpur P.S. Case No. 235 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the
BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that during inspection, one overloaded truck with sand
was apprehended near SDS college, but driver fled and the truck
along with 50.15 metric ton yellow sand was seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant, it is next submitted that the sand was being
carried in pursuance of a validly issued challan, but the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79580 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/2
authorities for reasons best known implicated the petitioners in
the instant false case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the anticipatory bail application and submits that the challan
furnished by the petitioners was issued in favour of Maa
Rajeshwari Construction, Gopalganj and the challan was issued
only for 22.87 metric ton yellow sand, but in the truck 50.15
metric ton yellow sand was found which was in much more
quantity than for which the challan were issued. It is also
submitted that minor mineral within the meaning of Section 2(e)
of the MMDR Act are natural resources and public property and
the manner in which illegal sand mining is resorted to, the same
is having adverse impact on the environment also.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…