Patna High Court
Md. Altaf @ Md. AltabversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The bail application was disposed of, effectively denying pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Altaf, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, alleging involvement in a fertilizer smuggling operation where a truck carrying 666 sacks of urea was seized. He contended that he was not named in the FIR, had no knowledge of the loading, and was not a public distribution system dealer, thus no offence under the Act. The State opposed the bail, arguing the allegations warranted detention. The Court examined the FIR and found no violation of Section 20 of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, and, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Amba Lal v. Union of India, noted that the seized truck should not lose value. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to seek appropriate relief for the truck’s release and disposed of the bail application without granting bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is liable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in the alleged fertilizer smuggling case.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Essential Commodities Act
- fertilizer smuggling
- public distribution system
- seizure
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4972 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2025 Thana- BHIMPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Md. Altaf @ Md. Altab, S/o Late Md. Mumtaz @ Mamtaj, Resident of
Mohallah - National Para, P.S- Katwa, District- Burdwan, (East) West
Bendgal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Bhimpur P.S. Case No. 04 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential
Commodities Act, 1955.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., on
07.01.2025, Ashok Kumar Chaurasiya, Fertilizer Inspector-cum-
Agriculture Coordinator, Chhatapur, Supaul, submitted a written
report to the SHO, Bhimpur, stating that at 4: 30 A.M. he
received information from a Night Patrolling Officer about
fertilizer smugglers namely Sachin Mehta, Saroj Mehta, and
Anuj Mandal @ Anuj Kamat who had brought a truck near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4972 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
Main Canal Nahar (72 RD). Acting on this, he reached the spot
at about 05:30 A.M., where police had already detained truck
No. WB-41J-1000 and its driver, Chandra Manjhi. The accused
allegedly fled on seeing the police. After search of the truck in
presence of witnesses, 666 sacks of urea (45 kg each) of
B.V.F.C. company were recovered. The driver stated the
consignment was brought from Burdwan, West Bengal, at the
instance of the accused, after which a seizure list was prepared.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has not
committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He is not named
in the F.I.R. Without knowledge and consent of the petitioner,
the driver got the truck loaded with the seized fertilizer. The
petitioner is not a public Distribution System dealer, hence no
case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is made
out against the petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the F.I.R., I don’t find that there is any violation of Section 20 of
the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4972 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
2016. However, considering the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Amba Lal Vs. Union of India,
1961 AIR 264, the truck should not deteriorate its value day by
day.
7. The petitioner, if so advised, may avail appropriate
remedy to get the truck released on such terms and conditions as
the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
8. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…