TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Kashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Illegal mineral mining evergrowing: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Chandigarh, January 10

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has described the menace of illegal mining in the region as “ever-growing”, before making it clear that an accused in such case did not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Justice Meenakshi I Mehta also made it clear that illegal mining was harming the environment and the ecological system of the area.

The ruling by Justice Mehta came after an accused in a theft case moved the High Court apprehending arrest, following the registration of an FIR on September 26, 2021, at the Lopoke police station in Amritsar, under Section 379 of the IPC and the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act.

Advertisement

The Bench was told that the petitioner, coming on a tractor trailer, stopped on being signalled by a police team. However, he escaped from there. The vehicle was loaded with 400-feet ‘sand’ without any permit or requisite document.

Appearing before the Bench, his counsel contended that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case. He had not been apprehended on the spot. As such, he deserved the relief of anticipatory bail. The State counsel, on the other hand, argued that the petitioner was involved in one more case of similar nature in addition to the present case. Keeping in view the nature of the offence committed by him, the petition was required to be dismissed, the State counsel added.

Refusing to grant the concession, Justice Mehta added the tractor, to which the trolley loaded with ‘sand’ was attached, was allegedly being driven by the petitioner,

who allegedly escaped from the spot on noticing the police party. Document or permit regarding the ‘sand’ loaded in the tractor trailer was not available.

“Keeping in view the ever-growing menace of illegal mining of the minerals in the region, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail. Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed,” Justice Mehta said.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement