Mustafaeez Akram Alias Mustkim Akram vs. The State Of Jharkhand
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Mustafaeez Akram, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No. 69 of 2023. The case was registered for offences under the Indian Penal Code and provisions related to mining and minerals. The petitioner is alleged to have been illegally operating a crusher machine that had been sealed in a previous case (Chouparan P.S. Case No. 266 of 2022). The petitioner's counsel argued that the allegations were false and that the petitioner possessed valid consents under the Water and Air Pollution Acts, as well as a GST Registration Certificate for his proprietorship, M.K. Stones. The petitioner also undertook to cooperate with the investigation and furnish security.
Held
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The Court considered the submissions of both counsels and the facts presented. It was of the opinion that the case was fit for granting anticipatory bail. The petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon his arrest or surrender within six weeks from the date of the order. This release was conditional upon depositing cash security of Rs. 50,000/- and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh. The petitioner was also required to cooperate with the investigation, appear before the Investigating Officer when noticed, and provide his mobile number and Aadhar Card copy with an undertaking not to change his mobile number during the pendency of the case. The Court referenced conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (or its equivalent in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), considering the allegations of illegal operation of a sealed crusher machine and associated offences under the Indian Penal Code and mining laws? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the allegations were false. He highlighted that he had obtained necessary consents under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, for establishing the crusher. Furthermore, he possessed a GST Registration Certificate for his business, M.K. Stones, indicating legitimate operation. He also offered to furnish security and cooperate with the investigation. Revenue's Arguments: The State (Opposite Party) opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Sections Cited
Section 482
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4852 of 2024
------ Mustafaeez Akram @ Mustkim Akram @ Md. Mustafaeez Akram, aged about 55 years, son of Late Tahir Hussain, resident of village –Jalwabad, P.O. & P.S. –Koderma, District –Koderma. … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State
: Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 20.03.2025
Heard the parties.
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No.69 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188/379/414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Mines Mineral Concession Rule, 2004 and Rule 9/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was illegally operating crusher machine which was sealed in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No. 266 of 2022. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been accorded consent under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to establish crusher and in this respect, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to annexure-2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 09.08.2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the proprietor of M.K. Stones which has obtained GST Registration Certificate also, copy of which has been kept at page nos. 13-14 of the supplementary
affidavit dated 09.08.2024. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.50,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh, in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No.69 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu/Gunjan-
Reproduced from the public record of the Jharkhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.