Jharkhand High Court
Nandlal Yadav Aged About 41 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... .... ... on 3 April, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
( 2025:JHHC:10326 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.2182 of 2025
------
1. Nandlal Yadav aged about 41 years Son of Late Kupan Yadav
2. Binod Yadav @ Binod Kumar Yadav aged about 34 son of Late
Jamun Yadav @ Jamuna Yadav
3. Chupali Yadav @ Thupali Yadav aged about 52 years son of Late
Basudeo Yadav
4. Krishna Yadav aged about 42 years Son of Karu Yadav
5. Maheshi Yadav @ Mahesh Yadav aged about 38 years Son of
Raghu Yadav
6. Birju Yadav @ Kuleshwar Yadav aged about 39 years Son of Late
Khushi Yadav @ Kushi Yadav
7. Chandrika Yadav @ Chandrika Kumar Yadav, aged about 30
years son of Teja Yadav
All are residents of village Postiya, P.O.-Jori, Police Station-
Bashisthnagar, District-Chatra.
.... .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rahul Dev, Advocate
: Ms. Shipra Sonam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P.
------
Order No.02 Dated- 03/04/2025
Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case
No.163 of 2018 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 33 of
Indian Forest Act, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of
privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the
allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were cultivating
poppy crops inside the forest area and encroached upon the forest land. It
is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next
submitted, drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-2, which is the
judgment dated 04.03.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-V-
cum-Special Judge, Chatra in NDPS Case No.32 of 2018 that the
petitioners who faced the trial in the police case for cultivating poppy,
have since been acquitted. It is next submitted that there is no allegation
against the petitioners of damaging the forest area and the only allegation
against them is that they have cultivated the forest land. It is next
submitted that because of village politics, the petitioners have falsely been
implicated in this case. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake
that they will not to go to the place of occurrence land or any other forest
land during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the
petitioners undertake to co-operate with the trial of the case and to furnish
sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the
petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and
circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are
directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and
in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail
on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Chatra in connection
with Complaint Case No.163 of 2018 with the condition that he will co-
operate with the trial of the case and they will not to go to the place of
occurrence land or any other forest land during the pendency of the case
and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Abhiraj/
