Ravi Kumar @ Pro. Ravi Kumar @ Proprietor Ravi KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34006 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2026 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Ravi Kumar @ Pro. Ravi Kumar @ Proprietor Ravi Kumar S/o Lalbabu
                 Prasad Resident of Village- Lauriya, Ward No. 02, P.S.- Lauriya, District-
                 West Champaran, Proprietor of M/S Hariom Khad Bhandar, Hanuman
                 Chowk, P.S.- Lauriya, District- West Champaran

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Agricultural Co-ordinator-cum-Fertiliser           Inspector,     Lauriya,     West
                 Champaran Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Madhukar Anand, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-05-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                           2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection

                   with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 83 of 2026 dated 11.02.2026

                   registered for the offence punishable under Section/s 318(4),

                   316(2), 336(2), 336(3) of the B.N.S. and Section 7 of the E.C.

                   Act.

                           3. As per prosecution case, the allegation, in brief, is that

                   pursuant to the directions of the Sub-Divisional Officer,

                   Narkatiyaganj and the District Agriculture Officer, an enquiry

                   team inspected the godown of M/S Hariom Khad Bhandar,

                   whose licence had already been cancelled on 19.12.2025 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34006 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
                                            2/4




          recovered 1059 bags of fertilizers stored therein. It is alleged

          that despite cancellation of licence, the proprietor Ravi Kumar

          illegally stored the fertilizers for the purpose of hoarding and

          black marketing.

                  4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged

          in the F.I.R. It is submitted that petitioner is the proprietor of

          M/s Hariom Khad Bhandar which firm was granted license to

          carry out the business of a dealer in fertilizer through license no.

          D-SL20318042475693, for a period from 01.04.2024 to

          31.03.2029. It is next submitted that on the basis of certain

          information based on conjectures and surmises, the petitioner’s

          license is said to have been cancelled by showing difference in

          quantity in POS machine in relation to the stock in the

          warehouse and, as also, for having sold out fertilizers without

          giving any chance to explain the actual position. It is the case of

          the petitioner that all of a sudden, vide letter dated 19.12.2025,

          the petitioner was directed to deposit the POS machine, which

          the petitioner had complied and the shop/godown was sealed. It

          is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has never sold out

          any fertilizers beyond the invoices, which was available with the

          petitioner as per the stock register and the allegations are false
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34006 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
                                             3/4




          and frivolous. It is also the case of the petitioner that against

          cancellation, there is already an appeal pending and all these

          issues, for which the First Information Report has been

          registered, can be gone into by the authorities in the said

          statutory appeal, which has been preferred by this petitioner.

                  5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant

          of anticipatory bail.

                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the fact that all the issues may be considered in

          appeal and the petitioner is required to place all such materials

          which would be essential for ventilating his grievances in the

          pending appeal, let the petitioner, above named, be released on

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

          court below within a period of four weeks from today on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned Sub-Divisoinal Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West

          Champaran in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 83 of

          2026, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)

          of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions:

                  (i)   One      of    the    bailors     should   be   the   family

          member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34006 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
                                                          4/4




                        official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;

                                (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date

                        before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

                        dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail

                        bond by the Trial Court itself;

                                (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

                        promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                        failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                        cancellation of the bail bonds.



                                                                             (Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-

U         T