Patna High Court
Avdhesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) CrPC.
Summary
Avdhesh Kumar was implicated in a case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for allegedly dealing in PDS material, with an E‑Pos inspection showing 201.33 quintals supposedly in his godown, which was found empty. The petitioner claimed the material was stored in a nearby building due to repairs and that he had informed authorities, asserting the allegations were false and that he had a clean antecedent. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the facts and submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) and related provisions, requiring bail bonds, sureties, and compliance with specific conditions. The order emphasized that any observations made would not affect the trial. The bail was ordered to be effective for four weeks from the date of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in view of the allegations under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.
- Whether the circumstances alleged by the petitioner regarding the storage of the material negate the charge of black‑marketing.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 2
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438, 482
- Essential Commodities Act — s. 7
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Essential Commodities Act
- Section 7
- PDS dealer
- black marketing
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2643 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Avdhesh Kumar, S/O Lakshman Paswan, Resident of village and P.S-
Chhatapur, District - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Meena Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 282 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Sections 7 of the E.C. Act.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is
P.D.S. dealer and on inspection through E-Pos machine shows
total 201.33 quintals to be available with the petitioner,
however, the godown of the petitioner was found to be empty.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2643 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only because
he did not fulfill the extraneous demand made by the informant
and others. It has further been submitted that the godown of the
petitioner was under repair and the entire material was kept in a
nearby building, however, despite such submission being made
by the petitioner, the same was not taken into account. It has
next been submitted that the bona fide of the petitioner can be
judged from the fact that, by Annexure P-2, he had been writing
to the authorities with regard to the aforesaid situation, where he
had kept the entire material in a separate building and despite
such fact, no cognizance has been taken upon his request. It has
also been submitted that the said material is still available with
the petitioner and therefore the allegation of black marketing is
false and concocted. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2643 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 282 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is
found that the petitioner has concealed his 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2643 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…