Baby Malakar v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner For the State ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP : : 2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, learned APP for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 439 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 25.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodity Act, 1955.
Allegation against the petitioner is that during course of physical verification of stock of food grains zero balance is found whereas stock shows 101.46 quital balance.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is a PDS dealer having a valid license bearing License Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.619 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 No. 01 of 2020. As per allegation in the F.I.R., the official has inspected the shop of the petitioner on 25.09.2024 and in course of inspection it has been found that there was zero balance of food grains. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that without verifying the physical verification, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case and the official has not verified the stock register of the petitioner.
Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and official without verifying the record has instituted the present case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 439 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :- Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.619 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 (1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.