Mithlesh Kumar Singh vs. The State Of Jharkhand
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Mithilesh Kumar Singh, proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises, is seeking anticipatory bail. He apprehends arrest in connection with Dumri P.S. Case no.12 of 2024, registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Coal Mines Act, the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, and the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, and Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The case involves the seizure of coal loaded on a truck from the petitioner's depot. The petitioner claims the coal was purchased through an auction from Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) and was being transported with valid invoices, E-way bills, and Form D transport challans. He asserts he has all necessary licenses and registrations, including GST, and has cooperated with the investigation.
Held
The Court, having heard the learned counsel for both parties, is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The reasoning appears to be based on the petitioner's submission that he possesses all the necessary documentation for the transportation of the coal, including invoices, E-way bills, and transport challans, and that he has valid business registrations. The Court found merit in the petitioner's plea for anticipatory bail, considering his assertion of legitimate business dealings and his undertaking to cooperate with the ongoing investigation. The Court did not delve into the merits of the criminal charges themselves but focused on the grounds for granting anticipatory bail. The ratio decidendi is that if an individual demonstrates possession of valid documentation for the goods being transported and undertakes cooperation with the investigation, anticipatory bail may be granted, pending further investigation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Dumri P.S. Case no.12 of 2024, considering the allegations of illegal mining, transportation, and storage of coal, and related offenses under the Indian Penal Code and specific mining legislation? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argues that he has been falsely implicated and has committed no offense. He relies on the fact that the seized coal was loaded from his depot with valid documentation, including an invoice from BCCL, an E-way bill, and a Form D transport challan. He also highlights his valid mineral dealer certificate, MSME registration, and GST registration, asserting his legitimate business operations. He undertakes to cooperate with the investigation. Revenue's Contention: The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) opposes the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail.
Sections Cited
Section 30(ii) of the Coal Mines Act, Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules 4 & 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ----- Mithilesh Kumar Singh, S/o Dharmraj Singh, Village Bhuiphore, Amaghata, P.S. & District Dhanbad.
.......... Petitioner. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand
.......... Opp. Party. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP ----- Order No.05
Date: 24.09.2024
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 379, 411, 414, 467, 468, 471, 420, 201 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code; Section 30(ii) of the Coal Mines Act; Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957; Rules 4 & 54 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004; and Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The petitioner is proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises from where the alleged seized coal was loaded on the truck bearing registration no.UP-41AT- 5972. The driver of the said truck had loaded the aforesaid seized coal from the petitioner’s depot i.e. M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises vide Invoice no.BE/23-24/5704 dated 30th January, 2024 along with E-way Bill no.491408231761 dated 30th January, 2024 and the same was valid up to 3rd February,
The driver of the said truck having valid Form D transport challan proceeded to Sidhgiri Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Ayodhya- Faizabad (U.P.), but during transit the police intercepted the said vehicle and in spite of showing papers relating to transportation of the said coal, the police personnel without any rhyme and reason arrested the driver and cleaner as well as seized the vehicle loaded with coal.
It is further submitted that the petitioner had purchased the said coal from Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad in auction on 9th September, 2023 and to that effect invoice was also issued in the name of M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises. Thereafter, final allocation letter dated 12th September, 2023 was issued by the Coal India Limited by allocating Patherdih 5.0 MTPA washery rejects and allotting 1200 MT of coal. Subsequently the railway receipt transmitted through electronic mode was obtained on 14th November, 2023 vide tax invoice no.9923112015081062 along with Form D transport challan vide Sl. No.F102301497/1. E-way bill was also issued by the BCCL, Patherdih Washery vide E-way bill no.441390292561 dated 27th November, 2023. 4. It is also submitted that the petitioner is licensee holder and has a valid mineral dealer certificate vide Mineral Dealer Registration no.J020421542. M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises is also registered under MSME having Udyam Registration Certificate No.UDYAM-JH-04-0002049. Similarly, the petitioner is also -2- having a valid GST Registration No.20BBEPS2554P1ZE. The petitioner also undertakes to co-operate in ongoing investigation of the case. Hence, he may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, in event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, in connection with Dumri P.S. Case no.12 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/
-3-
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.