Shivdayal Baidh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3065 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2021 Thana- ALIPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Shivdayal Baidh Son Of Suresh Baidh Resident Of Village - Hasanpur, P.S.- Alipur, Distt.- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravindra Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Rule 11, 39 Bihar Mineral (Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules and MM (DR) Act 1957 and Rule 56(1) and 52(2) B.M. (CPIMTS) Rule 2019 and Section 15 of Environment Protection Act, 1986.

Prosecution case is that on 21.07.2021 at about 3PM during the course of raiding about 90,000 cubic feet of sand was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3065 of 2022(2) dt.12-07-2022 2/2 found to be illegally stored near village Turi on the land of accused Shivdayal Vaid.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that petitioner is the victim of this case and sand was illegally stored on his land for which he had informed SHO of P.S. Alipur regarding the said storage. He submits that the petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the conduct of the petitioner and the huge quantity of illegally stored sand, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Alipur P.S. Case No. 74 of 2021.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T