RAMAN KUMAR SINGH vs The State of Bihar
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20425 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2016 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
RAMAN KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE RAM CHANDRA PRASAD
SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - GAUTAM NAGAR, WARD NO - 11,
POLICE STATION - SAHARSA, POST OFFICE - SAHARSA, DISTRICT -
SAHARSA
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeet Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-05-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order of
cognizance dated 13.09.2018 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, in connection with Jagdishpur P.S.
Case No. 37 of 2016, whereby cognizance was taken of offences
punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, as disclosed in the First
Information Report and the charge-sheet, is as follows. On
03.02.2016, on the basis of secret information received, two trucks
bearing registration numbers BR-10G-1884 and DL-1GA-6303
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
2/7
were intercepted near Baijani Petrol Pump on the Bhagalpur-
Bounsi Road. Upon verification, the wheat bags loaded on the
trucks were found to be marked "Govt. of Punjab, Crop Year 2015-
2016" and bore machine stitching that had been replaced with
hand stitching, suggesting tampering. A total of 822 bags of wheat
weighing approximately 405 quintals were recovered. The seized
wheat was handed over on zimmanama while the trucks were
retained in police custody. The informant suspected the wheat to
be subsidised government food grain intended for distribution
under the Public Distribution System. Since the truck drivers fled
the scene and no valid documents were produced, the contractor
Raman Kumar Singh, the petitioner herein, and one Subodh Gupta
were alleged to be involved in the illegal transportation and black
marketing of the said food grains.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was
engaged as a Transport-cum-Handling Agent of the Bihar State
Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Bhagalpur, and that his role
was strictly confined to the transportation of food grains from the
railhead to the godowns of the Corporation. It is further submitted
that the food grains in question were released in favour of one
Alok Kumar by order dated 11.05.2016 (Annexure P/5 at page 54
of the paper book) passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7802 of 2016 (Alok
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
3/7
Kumar and others v. The State of Bihar and others). It is also
submitted that the learned District and Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur,
by order dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure P/9 of the Supplementary
Affidavit), set aside the order of confiscation of Truck No.
84/2015-16 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 59 of 2017 (Raman
Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar and others).
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
the First Information Report does not disclose any contravention
of an order made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities
Act, 1955, which is an indispensable condition precedent for
prosecution under Section 7 of that Act. The allegation, as it
stands, is one of involvement in black marketing simpliciter,
without specification of any Control Order that the petitioner is
alleged to have violated. It is submitted that the petitioner had no
ownership, dominion, or proprietary interest over the food grains
in question; the seized food grains belonged to one Alok Kumar. In
the absence of any act of misappropriation, diversion, or dishonest
application, the offences alleged against the petitioner are not
made out even if the entirety of the prosecution case is taken at
face value.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
4/7
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has
vehemently opposed the quashing of the order of cognizance dated
13.09.2018 and submitted that the matter requires trial.
7. This Court has considered the submissions advanced
on either side and has perused the First Information Report and the
charge-sheet filed in the case.
8. The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash criminal
proceedings is well settled and is exercised sparingly and with
circumspection. The power is invoked where, on a plain reading of
the First Information Report and the accompanying material, no
offence is made out, or where the continuation of the proceedings
would constitute an abuse of the process of the court. This Court
does not, at this stage, adjudicate upon disputed questions of fact
or embark upon a mini-trial. The question is whether, assuming
every allegation in the prosecution case to be true, the ingredients
of the offences charged are, in law, disclosed against the accused.
9. Applying the aforesaid test to the present case, a
perusal of the First Information Report and the charge-sheet
reveals that there is no material to show that the petitioner sold,
diverted, or otherwise misused the seized food grains for his own
benefit or gain. The petitioner was a Transport-cum-Handling
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
5/7
Agent. His engagement was to move food grains from one
designated point to another on behalf of the Corporation. In the
absence of any allegation of dishonest application or wilful
entrustment of the goods for a purpose inconsistent with the terms
of the contract, the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust
under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code are not made out.
Similarly, Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code deals with
criminal breach of trust by a servant, clerk or agent entrusted with
dominion over property in his capacity as such. There is no
allegation in the prosecution case that the petitioner had dominion
over the food grains in question, or that he dishonestly
misappropriated or converted them to his own use. The offence
under Section 409 I.P.C. is therefore not attracted on the facts as
alleged.
10. As regards Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the
offence of cheating with dishonest inducement requires that the
accused dishonestly induced the complainant to deliver property,
or to make, alter, or destroy a valuable security. Neither the First
Information Report nor the charge-sheet contains any allegation
that the petitioner deceived any person or dishonestly induced the
delivery of property. The bare fact of alleged association with the
transportation of goods, without more, cannot supply the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
6/7
ingredient of deceit that is constitutive of the offence under
Section 420 I.P.C.
11. So far as the charge under Section 7 of the Essential
Commodities Act, 1955 is concerned, the prosecution of an
accused under that provision is predicated upon proof of
contravention of an order made under Section 3 of the Act. The
First Information Report and the charge-sheet do not specify any
Control Order, notified under Section 3, which the petitioner is
alleged to have contravened. A prosecution under Section 7 cannot
be sustained in the absence of such a foundation. The allegation of
black marketing, standing alone and unaccompanied by reference
to the specific Control Order violated, does not satisfy the
statutory precondition for prosecution.
12. There is also the significant circumstance that there
is no law restricting the movement of wheat within the State of
Bihar. The seized food grains were released in favour of one Alok
Kumar pursuant to an order of a competent court. Furthermore, the
order confiscating the truck was set aside by the learned District
and Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, in appeal. This appellate finding,
though not conclusive of criminal liability, indicates that no
finding of criminality or unlawful conduct was sustained at that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20425 of 2023 dt.11-05-2026
7/7
stage. The cumulative effect of these circumstances reinforces the
conclusion that no offence is made out against the petitioner.
13. In view of the foregoing, the continuation of
criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an
abuse of the process of the court, and this is a fit case for exercise
of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, the order of
cognizance dated 13.09.2018 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, in connection with Jagdishpur P.S.
Case No. 37 of 2016, is hereby quashed insofar as it relates to the
petitioner.
14. The petition is, accordingly, allowed.
(Ansul, J)
abhishekkr/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 04.06.2026
Transmission Date