Patna High Court
Baby MalakarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail is warranted where the petitioner has a clean antecedent and the prosecution’s case lacks proper verification, subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
Baby Malakar, a licensed PDS dealer, was implicated in a case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodity Act, 1955 for an alleged shortage of food grains during a physical verification. She applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that the investigating officer had not verified her stock register and that she has a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting the lack of verification by the officials and the petitioner's clean antecedent, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. The order also stipulated cooperation with the trial, presence in court, and provisions for bail cancellation upon tampering with evidence or concealment of antecedents. The bail bond is to be accepted without delay for verification purposes.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged false implication and clean antecedent.
- Whether the investigating officer’s failure to verify the stock register justifies bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Essential Commodity Act
- Section 7
- food grain shortage
- PDS dealer
- clean antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.619 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-439 Year-2024 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Baby Malakar wife of Arvind Malakar Village- Panchayat Binda Block and
PS- Barachatti, Dist- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in
connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 439 of 2024, F.I.R.
dated 25.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Section 7 of the Essential Commodity Act, 1955.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that during
course of physical verification of stock of food grains zero
balance is found whereas stock shows 101.46 quital balance.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and she has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
petitioner is a PDS dealer having a valid license bearing License
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.619 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
No. 01 of 2020. As per allegation in the F.I.R., the official has
inspected the shop of the petitioner on 25.09.2024 and in course
of inspection it has been found that there was zero balance of
food grains. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that without verifying the physical verification, the petitioner
has been made accused in the present case and the official has
not verified the stock register of the petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and
official without verifying the record has instituted the present
case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days
from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned S.D.J.M., Sherghati, Gaya in connection with
Barachatti P.S. Case No. 439 of 2024, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other
following conditions :-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.619 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…