Anticipatory bail granted for illegal paddy transportation where applicant held valid procurement license and storage facilities.

The applicant, Sonu Agrawal, sought anticipatory bail following the registration of Crime No. 19/2026 for offenses under Sections 318(4) [Cheating] of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The prosecution alleged that on 13.12.2025 and 06.01.2026, the Food Department intercepted four Mazda vehicles connected to the applicant carrying 864 bags (345 quintals) of paddy without valid permits.

It was alleged the paddy was being transported from Odisha to be sold illegally in Chhattisgarh, causing a loss of ₹28,17,305 to the State exchequer.

The applicant contended he is a licensed trader under "Tanish Traders," the vehicles were stationary on his property while his storage area was being repaired, and no incriminating documents like "Kisan Kitabs" were seized.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the protection of anticipatory bail given his status as a licensed trader and the nature of the allegations regarding illegal paddy transportation.

The court primarily applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the grant of anticipatory bail.

The Court considered the substantive charges under Section 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, regarding cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.

It further adhered to the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, weighing the gravity of the offense against the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents and the validity of his commercial licenses.

The Court examined the competing claims of the State and the applicant.

While the State argued that custodial interrogation was necessary due to the economic loss and the seriousness of the alleged conspiracy, the Court found merit in the applicant’s documentary evidence.

Specifically, the Court noted that the applicant is a licensed holder in the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti (Tanish Traders) and possessed the legal right to procure and sell paddy.

The Court observed that the vehicles were reportedly stationary on the applicant's land (Khasra No. 468/5) during storage facility repairs, and no specific documents were seized to prove illegal sales to the government procurement system.

Given that the investigation and trial were likely to take significant time and the applicant had no prior criminal record, the Court determined that the applicant's liberty should be protected subject to stringent conditions.

It held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released upon executing a personal bond with one surety.

The Court imposed specific conditions, including: (a) non-interference with witnesses; (b) regular appearance before the trial court; (c) submission of Aadhaar verification; and (d) a prohibition against committing similar offenses in the future.