Dharamjeet Singh @ Dharjit Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

Dharamjeet Singh @ Dharjit Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be released on arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, Bihar, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. and additional conditions (bona fide family-member bailor; appearance on every Trial Court date with cancellation after two consecutive unjustified absences; no inducement/threat to witnesses or tampering with evidence).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025 dated 13.09.2025 registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (alleged black-marketing / non-handover of food grains as a P.D.S. dealer), should be released on anticipatory bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Taking into account that there had been a technical issue in uploading the status on the ePOS machine, the Court directed that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks.

Ratio / Principle

Release to be on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, Bihar, in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Key takeaways

Release further conditioned on: (i) one bailor being a family member/relative/known person providing official document or personal affidavit showing bona fide; (ii) appearance on each and every date before the Trial Court, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation of the bail bond by the Trial Court itself; and (iii) no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses nor tampering with evidence, failing which the State may take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PATNA HIGH COURT (Ajit Kumar, J.) — oral order dated 12-03-2026 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 15455 of 2026 arising out of Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, District Aurangabad — ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED. Petitioner Dharamjeet Singh @ Dharjit Singh, a P.D.S. dealer, apprehended arrest in a case registered on 13.09.2025 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955: after irregularities found on inspection of his shop, a show-cause notice (08.07.2024) went unheeded despite his reply, further inspection followed (17.09.2024), his P.D.S. license was cancelled (19.09.2024), and his shop was attached to another dealer, Kanchan Kumar, with the E-POS machine handed over to him; it was alleged that 33,887 kg of food grains were not handed over, indicating black marketing, leading to the FIR. Counsel argued the petitioner was innocent: a technical defect caused the wrong quantity to reflect on the ePOS machine, the defect had been reported to the authorities, and grains were distributed physically with beneficiaries' signatures taken in a register; petitioner claimed clean antecedents. The learned APP opposed the prayer. Granting bail 'taking into account that there had been technical issue in uploading the status on ePOS machine', the Court ordered release on arrest or surrender within four weeks on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Aurangabad, subject to Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. conditions and: (i) a bona fide family-member/relative/known bailor supported by official document or personal affidavit; (ii) appearance on every Trial Court date, two consecutive unjustified absences entailing cancellation by the Trial Court itself; and (iii) no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses and no tampering with evidence, failing which the State may seek cancellation of bail bonds.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15455 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2025 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad

======================================================

Dharamjeet Singh @ Dharjit Singh Son of Late Sant Bilash Singh Resident of Village- Kajapa, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad (Bihar)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 12-03-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025 dated 13.09.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section/s 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, a P.D.S. dealer, was found involved in irregularities during inspection of his shop. A show-cause notice was issued on 08.07.2024, and despite his reply, further inspection was ordered. After inspection on 17.09.2024, his P.D.S. license was cancelled on 19.09.2024. Subsequently, his shop was attached to another dealer, Kanchan Kumar, and the E-POS machine was handed over to him. It is alleged that 33,887 kg of food grains were not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15455 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3

handed over, indicating black marketing by the petitioner, leading to the filing of the FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is next submitted that, due to a technical issue, the wrong quantity was reflected on the ePOS machine, based on which allegations of black marketing were made against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner had informed the concerned authority about the technical defect in the POS machine and, therefore, he distributed the grains physically to the beneficiaries after taking their signatures in the register, but the opposite party did not consider the same prior to lodging the F.I.R. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into account that there had been technical issue in uploading the status on ePOS machine, let the petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15455 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3

thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, Bihar in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document / personal affidavit to show his bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(Ajit Kumar, J)

rishi/-

U T