Anis Eqbal vs. The State Of Jharkhand

Held

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The decision was based on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the materials on record. While the FIR alleged illegal excavation and transportation of coal causing revenue loss, the petitioners presented a genuine GST e-way challan and pointed to similar cases where anticipatory bail was granted. The Court found these factors sufficient to incline towards granting the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petitioners were directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks and, upon arrest or surrender, to be enlarged on bail with specific bond and surety amounts, subject to cooperation with the investigation, appearance before the investigating officer when noticed, furnishing mobile number and Aadhaar card photocopy, and an undertaking not to change their mobile number. The conditions under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure were also to be adhered to. No specific issue was left undecided.

Facts

The petitioners, Anis Eqbal and Pramod Kumar, sought anticipatory bail from the Jharkhand High Court apprehending arrest in connection with Jharia P.S. Case No. 52 of 2022. The case was registered under Sections 414 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(ii) of the Coal Mines Act. The First Information Report (FIR) alleged their involvement in illegal excavation and transportation of coal without valid documents, leading to significant revenue loss for the State Government. The petitioners claimed innocence and submitted that they had been falsely implicated. They annexed documents including a GST e-way challan, which was found to be genuine, though other materials were subject to investigation. They also pointed out that co-accused in similar cases had been granted anticipatory bail by the same court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the allegations of illegal excavation and transportation of coal causing revenue loss to the State, and the materials on record including a genuine GST e-way challan. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that they are innocent, falsely implicated, and have committed no offense. They highlighted the genuineness of the GST e-way challan and the fact that other co-accused in similar cases have been granted anticipatory bail. They also undertook to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any imposed conditions. Revenue/State's arguments: The State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, citing the nature of the allegations and the materials on record.