Patna High Court
Shashikant Singh @ Shashikant Prasad @ Sharma @ Shashikant Prasad SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and cooperation conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Shashikant Singh, a former Chairman of Darveshpura PACS, was implicated in an FIR concerning alleged misappropriation of rice from a Bihar State Food Corporation godown, invoking Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC. Although his name was not originally mentioned in the FIR, the investigation in 2019 linked him to the case, and he was later approached by police without having received any summons. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing his clean antecedent, lack of direct accusation, and that more than fifteen co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail by the same court. The State and BSFC opposed the relief but could not refute the precedent of bail to co‑accused. The court, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.25,000, two sureties, and a condition that the bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC despite his alleged involvement in offences under Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to numerous co‑accused creates a binding precedent for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 409
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC Section 409
- IPC Section 34
- rice theft
- investigation
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17011 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2017 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Shashikant Singh @ Shashikant Prasad @ Sharma @ Shashikant Prasad
Sharma S/o Late Ram Prakash Singh R/o Village - Saidi, P.S - Katrisarai,
District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bihar State Food Corporation (B.S.F.C), Nalanda at Biharsharif Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the BSFC.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and was Chairman
of Darveshpura PACS. It is next submitted that from perusal of
the FIR, it would manifest that the same was instituted on behalf
of D.M., Nalanda in terms of Letter No.4076 dated 28.06.2017
wherein it was alleged that the State Food Corporation’s
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17011 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
Godown, Nalanda was inspected and only 59279.50 quintal of
C.M.R. was found instead of 76203.71 quintals as such,
16768.50 quintal of rice was found missing and the rice which
was found in the godown was also of compromised quality,
thus, it was directed to lodge an FIR against Ranjit Kumar,
Godown Superintendent-cum-A.G.M. and Abhay Kumar,
Contractual Executive Assistant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired
during the course of investigation in the year 2019 but then the
petitioner was not aware that he also came to be implicated in
the instant case during course of investigation as he never
received any summon nor police ever came to his place. It is
next submitted that recently the police knocked the door of the
petitioner but then petitioner was not present at his house and
when his family members enquired that as to why the force has
come to the house, when it was disclosed that name of the
petitioner during the course of investigation transpired in the
instant case. It is further submitted that during the course of
investigation, it has come that accused persons including the
petitioner provided the number of non-existent vehicle by which
rice was carried.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17011 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that no suspicion even was raised against the petitioner
except the named accused persons. It is also submitted that
similarly situated co-accused have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc.
No.44788/2017 by an order dated 03.11.2017, further Ranjit
Prasad also had moved before this Court seeking anticipatory
bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.17843/2026 and the same came to be
allowed by a learned Coordinate Bench by an order dated
03.04.2026. It is further submitted that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may not abscond
rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
It is also submitted that more than 15 co-accused similarly
situated like petitioner have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by different coordinate Bench of this Court.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the BSFC opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then are not in a position to
rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner that more than 15 co-accused have been granted
the privilege of anticipatory bail by different coordinate Bench
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17011 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
of this Court.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Laheri P.S. Case No.279/2017, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. Further, one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be
his cousin brother, namely, Sanjeev Kumar.
9. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner
despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…