Patna High Court
Dhananjay BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhananjay Bind, feared arrest in a case alleging illegal sand excavation, storage and transportation, charged under Sections 303(2), 317(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., Sections 4 and 21 of the M.M.D.R. Act, and Section 56(ii) of the Bihar Minerals Rule. He claimed innocence, offered to deposit the alleged revenue loss of Rs.5,000, and cited his clean antecedents. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the nature of the accusation, the petitioner’s clean record and his undertaking to pay the loss, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and compliance with payment conditions, without delving into the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious allegations of illegal mining under the specified statutes.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 303(2), 317(2), 3(5), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal mining
- sand excavation
- revenue loss
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85429 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2024 Thana- HARPUR District- Munger
======================================================
Dhananjay Bind Son of Ramchandra Bind Resident of village - Mohanpur,
P.S.- Tetiya Bamber, District - Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pranav Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shaheen Begum, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2),
317(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., Sections 4 and 21 of the
M.M.D.R. Act and Section 56(ii) of the Bihar Minerals
(Concession, prevention of illegal mining, transportation and
storage) Rule.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner,
who happens to be owner of the seized tractor bearing Chassis
No. EZ1SG454834SM and Engine No. 3100FL83G746910F3,
along with other accused persons, is involved in illegal
excavation, storage and transportation of sand.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85429 of 2025(4) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. However, at this stage, without admitting
his guilt, petitioner undertakes to deposit the revenue loss
caused amounting to Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand).
Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
6. Considering the nature of accusation, clean
antecedents of the petitioner and aforesaid undertaking of the
petitioner, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioner 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Munger in connection with Harpur P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025,
subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S., along with the following terms and conditions:
A. Petitioner shall pay the alleged revenue
loss amounting to Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five
thousand) through demand draft in the Office
of the Mines Inspector, District Mining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85429 of 2025(4) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
Office, Munger.
B. A receipt of the payment shall be
furnished at the time of furnishing bail bond.
C. If petitioner fails to comply the aforesaid
direction of this Court, the Court below is
free to cancel the bail-bond of the petitioner.
8. It is made clear that without going into the merit of
the case, the aforesaid order has been passed only for the
purpose of grant of bail.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…