Thakur Mandal And Others vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.204/2021, registered for the alleged offence under Section 33(1)(C) of the Indian Forest Act, pending in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false allegation is made against the petitioners that they have encroached the forest area, however, the petitioners are residing on their plot. To buttress this argument, he refers Annexure-2, which are rent receipts. He further submits that identical case was filed in the year 1990 and the petitioners were acquitted in the year 1993.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the ground that the petitioners have encroached the forest area.

Annexure-2 is the documents, which are rent receipts and it has been pointed out that same allegation was made in the year 1990 and the petitioners have been acquitted in the year 1993. Further, there is dispute with regard to the area whether it is a forest land or of the petitioners.

In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Complaint Case No.204/2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.