Arun Kr. Pandey v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Food And Civil Suppplies Corporation Govt. Of Bi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.937 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- AURANGABAD ===========================================================

1. Arun Kr. Pandey Son of Ram Naresh Pandey, R/o Village- Baroondih, P.S.- Baroondih, District- Aurangabad.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate Aurangabad, Distt.-Aurangabad.

3. The Managing Director Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Bihar at Patna.

4. The District Manager, B.S.F.C., Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P.K. Sahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Advocate For the BSFC Mr. Anjani Kumar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Advocate Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-07-2017 Heard Mr. P.K. Sahi, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.

2. The petitioner is proprietor of Ramleela Rice Mill, Barundih, Barun, Aurangabad.

3. The F.I.R. bearing Barun Police Station Case No.57 of 2015 was registered, under Sections 406/409/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code, against the petitioner for alleged act of criminal

2/4 misappropriation of the cost of rice, which petitioner was to provide to the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., after milling the paddy provided for the purpose to the petitioner. Similar F.I.R. was lodged against different defaulters. The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2015, passed in Cr. Misc. No.26212 of 2015 with direction that the petitioner would deposit 20% of the outstanding dues.

4. Later on the State of Bihar challenged, the order granting anticipatory bail in different cases, before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLA(Cr.) No.1779 of 2016 and connected SLPs. The Hon'ble Apex Court did not interfere with the anticipatory bail, however, by order dated 28.02.2017 modified the conditions of the bail, which included that the accused in all the F.I.Rs. will ensure that Bank Guarantee, if not furnished, is furnished and if lapsed is renewed within a period of one month from the date of order, failing which the anticipatory bail/bail granted will stand cancelled. At the time of order aforesaid, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had considered Clause 3 of the agreement between the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplied Corporation Ltd. and the millers, which provided for furnishing of the bank guarantee of the value of the paddy which is taken for milling or for pledging of the immovable property of the

3/4 value of paddy.

5. The respondent-Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. issued notice vide Memo No.520 dated 12.04.2017 vide Annexure-2 against the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to deposit bank guarantee of rupees thirty one lakh twenty five thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine (Rs.31,25,879/-), failing which necessary step for cancellation of anticipatory bail would be taken.

6. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid notice on the ground that the petitioner had already pledged his immovable property at the time of entering into agreement for milling, therefore, additional surety of bank guarantee is onerous and not consistent with the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court.

7. On the other hand, Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., submits that the condition of bail was modified by the Hon'ble Apex Court after noticing the provisions of two types of sureties in Clause-3 of the agreement between the parties. Hence, it cannot be alleged that the direction of furnishing of bank guarantee by the accused in the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court was not for those who had already pledged immovable property of the value of the paddy.

4/4

8. The direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above referred S.L.P., in the matter of furnishing of the bank guarantee of the value of the paddy by the accused, is already there and the respondents are proceeding against the petitioner and others consistent with the direction aforesaid. If the petitioner desires any clarification regarding direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court is not the proper forum. Accordingly, this criminal writ application stands disposed of as devoid of any merit.

9. I.A. No.1286 of 2017, whereby the petitioner has sought for ancillary relief of setting aside Memo No.555, dated 15.05.2017, issued by the Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad, vide Annexure-1 to the interlocutory application, also stands disposed of in view of the result of the writ application aforesaid for the reason that by the aforesaid memo the Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad, has taken appropriate step to get warrant of arrest against the defaulters and directed to produce the warrantees before the Certificate Officer.

(Birendra Kumar, J.) Mkr./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 19.07.2017 Transmission Date 19.07.2017