Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 851 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ... on 16 July, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                           2025:JHHC:19323


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         A.B.A. No. 2706 of 2025
                                   ------
     Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Singh, aged about 42 years, son of
     Krishna Singh, Permanent resident of Qtr. No.B-720A, colony
     Bishanpur, P.O. & P.S.- Bishanpur, Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh).

     At present resident of Sijua Colony, Near- Durga Mandap, S.S. Q-
     184, P.O. & P.S.- Jogta, Dist. Dhanbad (Jharkhand),

                                                      ... ... Petitioner
                                     Versus
     The State of Jharkhand.                     ... ... Opposite Party
                                 ------
                      CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, A.P.P.

-----

04/ 16.07.2025

Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 of

the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred

by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajganj

P.S. Case No.70/2023, for offences under Sections 414/34 of IPC,

Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)

Act, 1957 and Rule, 7/9/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention

of illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The case

is presently pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Dhanbad.

3. The allegation is that on 30.12.2023 at 9:15 PM, the

informant was on patrolling duty along with other police officials.

He got a secret informant that some people were storing illegal coal

inside the boundary wall of Niwas Tiwary. The informant along with

other police officials reached the place of occurrence and found that

some people started running away, seeing the police force. 45 tons 2025:JHHC:19323

of coal was found there and the same was seized and seizure list

was prepared.

4. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner has appeared before the I.O.

in compliance of the notice filed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS

on 25.01.2024. He submits that thereafter, the police has not issued

notice to appear for investigation.

5. The submission of the petitioner clearly suggests that

the petitioner does not have any apprehension of being arrested.

Admittedly, the petitioner has replied the notice as he appeared

pursuant to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNNS and the

police has not sought for any warrant. Thus, I am of the opinion

that the apprehension of the petitioner is misconceived. The

petitioner is thus directed to appear before the Magistrate who will

pass an appropriate order taking into consideration the fact that the

petitioner has complied the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS

(which is reflected in paragraph No.8 of this petition) and in terms

of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this Anticipatory Bail

Application stands disposed of.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Sandeep. Cp-3