Bail granted to a Paddy Procurement Manager where primary responsibility for shortage rested with the person in charge.

The applicant, a Manager (Prabandhak) at the Paddy Procurement Centre, Konpara, was arrested on January 21, 2026, following allegations of paddy shortages discovered during physical verification for the 2024–25 season.

The prosecution alleged wilful disobedience of government orders regarding transportation agreements, resulting in a financial loss involving approximately 20,586.88 MT of paddy.

The applicant contended that under Clause 19.5 of the Paddy Procurement Policy 2024–25, the Manager is segregated from procurement activities, and the responsibility for shortages lies with the Fad Prabhari.

The applicant further asserted he had no criminal antecedents and had remained in custody since January 2026.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and the period of incarceration.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the High Court’s power to grant bail.

The Court considered the principles of bail jurisprudence, focusing on the nature and gravity of the offence, the absence of criminal antecedents, the status of the investigation (submission of the charge-sheet), and the likelihood of a prolonged trial.

Additionally, the court referenced Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to frame conditions for the prevention of liberty abuse.

The Court examined the applicant's role and the specific defense that liability rested with the Fad Prabhari per the procurement policy and existing agreements.

While the State opposed bail noting the seriousness of the financial loss, the Court highlighted that the charge-sheet had already been submitted before the competent court.

The Court reasoned that since the investigation against the applicant was complete and he had no prior criminal record, further pretrial detention was unnecessary, especially as the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude.

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions: he must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear personally for crucial trial stages (framing of charges and statement recording), and must comply with all procedural mandates under the BNSS to avoid revocation of bail.