Ramprasad Vaishya vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J

This is first bail application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with crime No.1122/2025, registered at P.S. - Waidhan District - Singrauli for offences punishable under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and under Section 316(5) of BNS 2023.

As per prosecution case it is alleged that upon verification and matching of the stored foodgrains with the stock recorded in the POS machine, it was found that there was a shortage of 15.15 quintals of wheat, 61.66 quintals of rice, and 0.03 quintals of sugar as compared to the actual stock. As a result of the shortage of stock, the accused, being the seller of fair price shop, misappropriated foodgrains worth Rs.1,85,997/-. During the investigation, the Deputy Commissioner, Co-operative Department, District Singrauli, exercising powers under Section 87 of the Madhya Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, along with the rules and bye-laws framed thereunder, held that any person exercising such powers or authorized to exercise such powers shall be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, since the accused is an employee of a cooperative society, he has been considered to fall within the ambit of a public servant, and therefore Section 316(5) of the BNS has been added to the case, which pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant in respect of property entrusted to him. From the perusal of the case diary, it is evident that Section 316(5) of the BNS was added to the case on 12-12-2025. Crime No.1122/25 was registered against the accused by Police Outpost Waidhan under Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

Counsel for the applicant submits that initially the applicant was granted anticipatory bail. However, as per the directions passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, after the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant has been arrested.

Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail initially by the trial Court and had co-operated with the investigation, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is allowed. It is directed that if the applicant is arrested by the police then he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.

Applicants shall abide by the following conditions under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S:-

(a) Applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

(b) They shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to complainant or witnesses;

(c) They shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

(d) They shall not commit similar offence, of which, they are accused or suspected.

(e) They will further abide by the condition enumerated in sub-section (3) of Section 480 of the B.N.S.S.

A typed copy of this order is being forwarded to the Office of the Advocate General, on their email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned.

With the aforesaid, the application is allowed and disposed off. Certified copy as per rules.