2017 Supreme(SC) 1734
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, UDAY UMESH LALIT
STATE OF BIHAR – Appellant
Versus
DIVESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY – Respondent
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sidharth Luthra,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar,Adv. Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv. Mr. Shivam Singh,Adv. Mr. Aditya Raina,Adv. Mr. Shreyas Jain,Adv. Ms. Varsha Poddar,Adv. Mr. Kumar Milind,Adv. Mr. Advitiya Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Vikram Singh Chauhan,Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Amrendra Saran,Sr.Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv. Mr. Ravi Bharuka,Adv. Mr. Nagendra Rai,Sr.Adv. Mr. Prateek Kumar,Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar,Adv. Mr. Shashank Saurabh,Adv. Mr. Shantanu Sagar,Adv. Mr. Anmol,Adv. Mr. Raju Ramachandran,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Gopal Jha,Adv. Ms. Snehil Sonam,Adv. Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey,Adv. Mr. Gautam Singh, Adv. Ms. Isha Singh,Adv. Mr. Vivek Vardhan,Adv. Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Rohit K. Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Singh,Adv. Ms. Snehil Sonam,Adv. Mr. S. Hegde,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sameer Kumar,Adv. Mr. Aditya Shankar,Adv. Mr. Anshuman Ashok,Adv. Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Yugal Kishor Prasad,Adv. Mrs.Parul Sharma,Adv. Mr. P.N. Singh,Adv. Ms. Suman Rani,Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Jha,Adv. Mr. Garvesh Kabra,Adv. Ms. Yugandhara Jha,Adv. Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Amit K. Nain,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha,Adv. Ms. Abha R. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Parmar,Adv. Mr. Susheet Tomar,Adv. Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava,Adv. Ms. Kavita Sharma,Adv. Mr. Kundan Kumar Mishra,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Anil K. Jha,Adv. Mr. S.K. Divakar,Adv. Ms. Priyanka Tyagi,Adv. Mr. S.K. Roshan,Adv. Mr. D. K. Devesh,Adv. Mr. Brajesh Kumar,Adv. Mr. A.P. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Sarvesh Singh,Adv. Mr. Herinder Kaur Brar,Adv. Mr. K.M. Mishra,Adv. Mr. Subodh K. Pathak,Adv. Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. D.K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Tewari,Adv. Ms. Shuchi Singh,Adv. Mr. Krishan Kant Dubey,Adv. Mr. Upendra N.Mishra,Adv. Mr. C.K. Pandey,Adv. Ms. Shashi Ranjan,Adv. Mr. Devendra Kumar Shukla,Adv. Mr. Chandan Kumar Pandey,Adv. Mr. Shyamal Kumar,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Ravi Chandra Prakash,Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Ranbir Singh Chailler,Adv. Mr. Narendra Kumar Goyal,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Singh,Adv. Mr. Prakash Kr.Singh,Adv. Mr. Neeraj Shekhar,Adv. Mr. Animesh Kumar,Adv. Mr. Rana Prashant,Adv. Mr. Nitesh Ranjan,Adv. Mr. Anshul Narayan,Adv. Ms. Rashmi,Adv. Mr. Smarhar Singh,Adv. Mr. Devesh Kumar Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Shishir Pinaki,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha,Adv. Mr. Atul Jha,Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar Saran,Adv. Mr. Chandan Kumar,Adv. Mr. Chandra Prakash,Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh,Adv. Mr. Prakash Gautam,Adv. Mr. Sujeet Kr.Singh,Adv. Mr. Anil Grover, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Adv. Mr. Ranjan Kumar,Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar,Adv. Mr. Amit Pawan,Adv. Mr. Prem Prakash,Adv.
ORDER :
Heard.
Permission granted.
Delay condoned.
These petitions have been preferred by the State of Bihar/Bihar State Food Civil Supplies Corporation against orders granting anticipatory bail/bail, in connection with cases, the facts of which are identical.
It has been stated by Mr. Siddharth Luthra, learned senior counsel appearing for the State/Corporation, that a sum of Rupees fifteen hundred crores in all has been allegedly misappropriated by the accused for which 600 FIRs have been filed. According to the case of the State, agreements for milling of paddy were entered into with different rice mills in pursuance of which paddy was handed over for milling but the rice from the milled paddy was not returned or was returned partly. Thus, there is misappropriation to a huge extent. In such circumstances, grant of anticipatory bail/bail will seriously hamper the investigation/trial resulting in huge loss to the State.
Our attention has been drawn to the Deed of Agreement. Clause 3 thereof provides for furnishing of bank guarantee for the value of paddy, which is taken for milling, or for pledging of the immovable property of the value of the paddy. There is also provision in clause 12
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
