Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38487 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2018 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== PINTU KUMAR S/o Ramchandra Prasad Rai Resident of Village- Parsouna, P.S.- Parsa, District- Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 16-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Section 7 of the E.C. Act registered in connection with Parsa P.S. Case No. 94/2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the accusation that he did not produce the distribution register of his PDS shop at the time of inspection on 22.05.2018 nor any grain was found stored in the shop. It is further alleged that the petitioner fails to supply food grains among the villagers for the month of May, 2018. It is further submitted that two such consumers have come forward and sworn affidavits, both on 04.05.2019 to the effect that they did not face any problem in receiving food grains from the petitioner's PDS shop and had no complaint in this regard. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP on the other hand invites reference to para 3 of the case diary in which 13 consumers have been examined, all of whom have unanimously stated that they had

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38487 of 2019(3) dt.16-09-2019 2/2 not received supplies for the month of May from the petitioner's shop. Similar statement of other consumers have been recorded in para 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the case diary.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T