Safik Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4972 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Safik Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ... on 17 April, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                             2025:JHHC:11610


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           A.B.A. No.3921 of 2024
                                     ------
     Safik Ansari, son of Haidar Ansari, resident of Village Oyna Muslim
     Toli, Lohardaga, P.O. Hirhi, P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga,
     Jharkhand.                                           ... ... Petitioner
                                    Versus
     The State of Jharkhand.                       ... ... Opposite Party
                                     ------
                      CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Prasad, Advocate.

     For the State            :   Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.
                                     -----


08/ 17.04.2025

     Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Sections 414/ 34 IPC and Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rules 54 of the Jharkhand Mines and Minerals Concession Rules, 2004.

3. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the anticipatory bail application, which the State availed and opposed.

4. The punishment is admittedly less than seven years.

5. As per the submission of learned counsel representing the petitioner, till date even no notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 35(3) of the BNSS has been issued to the petitioner.

6. Thus, I find that there is no eminent threat of arrest of the petitioner. Since the offence is punishable less than seven years, I am of the opinion that in this case the Police cannot arrest the petitioner without issuance of notice under Section 41A and if the petitioner also does not cooperate after issuance of said notice. This principle has been well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of

2025:JHHC:11610

Investigation & Another, reported in 2022 (10) SCC 51 as well as the observation made in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in 2024 (9) SCC 198.

7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail which shall be considered by the said Court strictly in compliance of the guidelines and observations laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Prashant. Cp-3