Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kumari RaniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a Rs 30,000 bond and conditions under the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, 2023.

Summary

Kumari Rani, a 61‑year‑old woman, was implicated in a case of alleged black marketing of wheat under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 after a stock shortage was discovered during a police inspection. The prosecution alleged that the shortage indicated illegal hoarding, while the petitioner contended that a defective POS machine caused the discrepancy and asserted her innocence. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, arguing her clean antecedent and the technical error in the inspection. The State opposed the bail, but the Court considered the merits of the bail application under the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, 2023. The Court granted anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 30,000 under Section 2(1)(d) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and subject to conditions of Section 482(2), and ordered the trial court to verify any criminal antecedents.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, 2023 in a case arising under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
  • Whether the alleged defect in the POS machine constitutes a sufficient ground to justify bail.
  • What conditions and bond amount are appropriate for anticipatory bail in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Essential Commodities Act
  • black marketing
  • POS machine defect
  • bail bond
  • criminal antecedent
  • B.N.S.S. 2023

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15850 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2026 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Kumari Rani W/o Ranjeet Kumar R/o Village - Giriyak, P.S - Giriyak, District
                 - Nalanda

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s

                                                        Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Shubham Samrat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Giriyak P.S. Case No. 12 of 2026 lodged on 07.01.2026,

                   for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential

                   Commodities Act, 1955.

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   the sole petitioner. It has been found by the authorities that

                   during inspection, there was shortage of stock of wheat and it is

                   due to this reason, allegation of black marketing has been made

                   against the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15850 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

          submits that the basis of inspection is the report in the POS

          machine, but he submits that there was defective POS machine

          provided and it is due to this reason, the less stock was found in

          the physical verification. Counsel further submits that the

          petitioner is a lady aged about 61 years, having clean

          antecedent. Counsel submits that no complaint was filed against

          the petitioner while she was running the work relating to PDS

          shop.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner but submits that from the petition, it

          transpires that the petitioner is a lady aged about 61 years and

          the defence of defective POS machine has been alleged in the

          FIR.

                       6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of

          this case, let the above named petitioner be released on

          anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the

          Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing

          bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as

          mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 to the

          satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15850 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       (Biharsharif), in connection with Giriyak P.S. Case No. 12 of

                       2026, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the

                       B.N.S.S., 2023.

                                    7. The Trial Court is directed to verify the criminal

                       antecedent(s) of the petitioner, and in case, it is found at any

                       stage that the petitioner has concealed the fact about her

                       criminal antecedent(s), the Trial Court shall take steps for

                       cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                       acceptance of the bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned

                       order shall not be delayed for the purpose of or in the name of

                       verification.



                                                                      (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.