Patna High Court
Tarun ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the court was not inclined to extend the privilege given the seriousness of the allegations.
Summary
The petitioner, Tarun Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for alleged black‑marketing of rice, wheat and kerosene meant for PDS beneficiaries. The complainant, Nardi Devi, alleged that the petitioner failed to distribute grains on time and that substantial quantities were missing from the stock registers, suggesting they were sold illegally. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he has a clean record, distributes supplies as per entitlement, and that the complaint is false. The State’s counsel opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged social offence and the need for interrogation to ascertain the truth. The bench, after considering the submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, concluding that the allegations warranted further investigation. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged black‑marketing of essential commodities.
Legislation cited
- Essential Commodities Act — s. 7
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Essential Commodities Act
- black marketing
- PDS distribution
- social offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18820 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- HARPUR District- Munger
======================================================
Tarun Manjhi S/O Late Bateshwar Manjhi Resident of Village- Sarouna,
Sangrampur, P.S- Harpur (Sangrampur), District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Allama Abdul Quadir Jamal Faridi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Harpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, registered for the
offences punishable under Section 7 of the Essential
Commodities Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that PDS of petitioner was inspected on 18-1-2024,
when beneficiary Nardi Devi along with 18 beneficiaries
complained that petitioner does not distribute grains on time and
when grain is distributed, the same is less than the entitlement,
next alleges that during inspection the stock of when, rise and
kerosene was found short, it is further alleged that the stock
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18820 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
register and the distribution register was asked from the
petitioner, it is alleged that 30.62 quital of rice, 127.72 quital of
wheat along with 386 litres of kerosene ought to have been in
the stock but the same was found missing thus alleges that the
aforesaid quantity of wheat, rice and kerosene was sold in
black-marketing.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that petitioner is distributing the
grains to the beneficiaries as per entitlement including kerosene
oil, but then Nardi Devi made a false complaint.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal
of the allegation, it is culled out that petitioner is indulging in
black-marketing of grains and kerosene oil meant for the
beneficiaries, as such it is a social offence also. It is further
submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and if it is
found that no black-marketing of grains and kerosene was
resorted to by the petitioner in that event final form would be
submitted, but then interrogation of the petitioner is required for
establishing the truth.
6. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18820 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.