Partly allowed

Paras Nath Singh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC30 Jul 2015CR. MISC./30260/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to a petitioner facing arrest under Sections 409 and 420 IPC for failure to supply custom milled rice under a government agreement. Bail is conditional on a 20% deposit of the due amount and сертификат proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Released on provisional anticipatory bail for 17 months subject to furnishing bond and depositing 20% of the alleged due amount within sixteen months.

Paras Nath Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.30260 of 2015

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -185 Year- 2015 Thana -BHABHUA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR)

¶3

====================================================== Paras Nath Singh, son of Late Jiut Singh, Managing Director of M/s Vina Paras Modern Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd, Bhabua, resident of Town Bhabua, Ward No. 6, P.O.+P.S.-Bhabua, District-Kaimur(Bhabua) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.K.Jha(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 30-07-2015 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

The prosecution case is that the petitioner being rice miller was supplied 45600 quintals of paddy by the Kaimur unit of Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation under agreement for the agriculture year 2012-13 against which the petitioner was supposed to supply 30552 quintals of Custom Milled Rice(CMR) but the petitioner only supplied 7289 quintals and failed to supply 23263 quintals of Custom Milled Rice worth Rs. 05,03,78,071.95/-.

¶5

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner failed to supply the processed rice due to the latches on the part of the authorities of the Bihar State

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30260 of 2015 (2) dt.30-07-2015

¶7

2/3

¶8

Food & Civil Supplies Corporation. The agreement stipulates recovery of due amount through initiation of certification proceeding under Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914. The certificate proceeding has already been initiated.

¶9

It is submitted by Mr. Sailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation that petitioner failed to supply the processed rice within stipulated time i.e. 31.12.2013 in spite of notices being issued to him and the Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, under the terms of the agreement is empowered to take legal action for recovery of the due amount.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that petitioner is ready to deposit 20% of Rs. 05,03,78,071.95/the alleged due amount within a period of sixteen months in eight equal installments through bank draft drawn in favour The Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Patna.

¶11

Considering the present stand of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail for 17 months on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 185 of 2015, G.R. No. 831 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30260 of 2015 (2) dt.30-07-2015

¶13

3/3

¶14

under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶15

The provisional bail of the petitioner will be confirmed by learned Court below on deposit of 20% of Rs. 05,03,78,071.95/-, the alleged due amount.

¶16

The aforesaid deposit will be subject to certificate proceeding or any other proceeding initiated for recovery of the due amount but the same will not be treated as admission of the petitioner against the informant.

¶17

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶18

Shageer/-

¶19

U T

Paras Nath Singh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paras Nath Singh v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhim Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandan Jha Vs The State Of Bihar

Sudarshan Kumar Paswan @ Sudarshan Paswan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Bulbul Kapar @ Kapari Vs The State Of Bihar

Nagendra Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Om Prakash @ Vyas Yadav Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.