Patna High Court
Amaresh UpadhyayaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Amaresh Upadhyaya applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging theft of 16,768.50 quintals of rice, with offences under Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC. He contended that he was falsely implicated by the Chairman of Gonawan PACS, was not named in the FIR, and has a clean antecedent. The petitioner argued that granting bail would enable his cooperation with the investigation, citing a prior anticipatory bail order granted to another individual in a related matter. The State and the Bihar State Food Corporation opposed the bail. The Court, noting the petitioner's clean record, alleged false implication, and willingness to cooperate, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, reserving the right to cancel bail if he fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Sections 409 and 34 IPC.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged false implication and clean antecedent justify bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC can be imposed to ensure cooperation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 409
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- rice theft
- IPC Section 409
- IPC Section 34
- CrPC Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6788 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2017 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Amaresh Upadhyaya S/O Gopalnandan Singh R/O Village- Gonawan, P.S-
Harnaut, Distt.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjiv Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta
For the B.S.F.C. : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the B.S.F.C.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 409 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and as
per prosecution case the allegation is that on verification
59,279.50 quintals CMR was found in place of 76,203.50
quintals of rice as such 16,768.50 quintals of rice was found
missing and even the quality of the rice was bad, thus the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6788 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/4
District Magistrate was directed to lodge an FIR against
Ranjit Kumar, Godown Superintendent and one Abhay
Kumar, Contractual Executive Assistant.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case
by the Chairman of Gonawan PACS. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name
transpired during the course of investigation after 2020. It is
also submitted that petitioner was not even aware that he
has been implicated in the instant case. It is also submitted
that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that godown of SFC was checked when it
was found that 16,768.50 quintals of rice was found missing
with which the petitioner being Chairman of the PACS had
no concern. It is further submitted that Ranbir Kumar Sinha
had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by
filing Cr. Misc. No.45468 of 2023 and the same came to be
allowed by an order dated 03.04.2024 passed by a learned
Coordinate Bench. It is also submitted that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner will not abscond
rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6788 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/4
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the B.S.F.C. opposes the anticipatory
bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds
in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor
Court in connection with Laheri P. S. Case No.279 of 2017,
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event, if
any application is filed by the Investigating Officer before
the learned trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner,
despite giving assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in
the investigation or is not presenting himself as and when
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6788 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
4/4
required, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel
the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned
Police Station through the learned trial Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…