Jharkhand High Court
Meghu Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.4565 of 2022
Meghu Yadav ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Adv.
For the State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl. P.P.
Order No.02 Dated- 14.06.2022
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Addl. P.P. for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with
Mihijam P.S. Case No. 164 of 2017 (G.R. Case No.1033 of 2017)
registered under sections 15(2), 15(4) of Petroleum and Mineral Pine
Line Act and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property
Act and Sections 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has
been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of confessional
statement of the co-accused person namely Rakesh Kumar Singh @
Kanhaiya Singh @ Balak. It is next submitted that nothing has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is further
submitted that the co-accused persons have faced the trial and have
been acquitted in this case. It is further submitted that there is nothing
against the petitioner save and except confessional statement of the co-
accused persons. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes
that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. The petitioner is
languishing in judicial custody since 20.10.2021. Hence the petitioner
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Learned Spl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
and submitted that the petitioner has a criminal antecedent of similar
offence. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Perusal of the record along with the impugned order and other
materials available on the record. It appears that the petitioner was not
named in the F.I.R. and his name was disclosed by the co-accused
person namely Rakesh Kumar Singh. As per the F.I.R., allegation
against the petitioner is that the informant Pankaj Kumar Sinha was
informed by D.G.R. guard that Haldia-Barauni Oil Pipeline was pilfered
at village Dekhipara and diesel had spilled for nearly 25 meters in
paddy field. It further transpires that informant reached the place of
occurrence, they removed clamp, nut-bolt, etc. In the 12 inch diameter
pipe line which was subsequently repaired there after the flow of oil
continue. It further transpires that the other co-accused persons have
been acquitted by the trial court after facing the trial in S.T. Case No.56
of 2018 vide judgment dated 29.01.2019 and the co-accused namely
Pradeep Kuamr Das @ Pradeep Kumar Das has already been granted
bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.09.2019
passed in B.A. No.8207 of 2019.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature
of allegation and period of custody of the petitioner, I am inclined to
release the above named petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner
named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Jamtara in connection
with Mihijam P.S. Case No. 164 of 2017 (G.R. Case No.1033 of 2017)
with the condition that the petitioner shall appear physically on each
and every date during the trial of the case unless prevented from
sufficient cause to satisfaction the learned trial court.
Pappu/ (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
