Patna High Court
Ashok KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties, and the condition of refunding Rs. 26,000 to the Mines Department.
Summary
Ashok Kumar, the registered owner of a tractor on which 100 cubic feet of sand was illegally mined, faced arrest in a complaint case under IPC sections 379 and 411, Section 21 of the MM(D&R) Act 1957 and Section 56 of the BM(CPIMTS) Amendment Act 2021. He applied for anticipatory bail, offering to refund Rs. 26,000 to the Mines Department, which did not oppose the refund. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, granted anticipatory bail on the condition that Kumar furnishes a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and deposits the refund amount via bank draft within eight weeks. The order was made without examining the merits of the underlying criminal allegations. Failure to comply with the refund condition would permit cancellation of the bail bond.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a complaint case involving offences under the IPC, MM(D&R) Act and BM(CPIMTS) Amendment Act.
- Whether the court may impose the condition of refunding the alleged proceeds as a term of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the prescribed bail bond and surety amounts are appropriate under the circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (Suppression) Act — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379, 411
- Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 — s. 21
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal mining
- theft
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- refund
- complaint case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83997 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-623 Year-2023 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
======================================================
Ashok Kumar S/O Raghulal Saw Resident of Village- Istpur, Jakhura,
Aurangabad (Bihar)- 823001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mines Department Gaya, Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Ms. Priya, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
For the Mines Deptt. : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Adv.
Ms. Kalpana, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
opposite party no. 2/Mines Department.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint
case punishable for the offence under Sections 379, 411 of the
I.P.C., Section 21 of MM(D&R) Act 1957 and Section 56 of
BM(CPIMTS) Amendment Act, 2021.
3. Petitioner is registered owner of the seized tractor,
upon which, 100 CFT illegally mined sand was loaded.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that petitioner is ready to refund the alleged money i.e.
Rs. 26,000/- (Rupees twenty six thousand) in the office of
Mines Department, for which, learned counsel for the opposite
party no. 2 does not oppose.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83997 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/2
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the above named petitioner, in the event of his
arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. - VI, Anjali Nag Court, Gaya in
connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 623 of 2023, subject to
condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. with further following
conditions:
“(A) At the time of furnishing bail-bond, the
petitioner shall refund Rs. 26,000/- (twenty six
thousand) through Bank Draft in the office of
opposite party no. 2 i.e. Mines Department, Gaya
and receipt of the same shall be furnished along
with bail-bond in the Court concerned.
(B) If petitioner fails to comply the direction of
this Court, the learned Court below would be at
liberty to cancel the bail-bond of the petitioner.”
6. It is made clear that aforesaid order has been
passed only for considering the prayer for anticipatory bail
without going into the merit of the case.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
Checking your session…