IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA th ON THE 17 OF FEBRUARY, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7175 of 2025 RAJESH DAHIYA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Amit K. Bajpai - Advocate for the applicant. Shri K. S. Patel - Govt. Advocate for respondent.

ORDER This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of BNSS seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR/Crime No. 09of 2025 registered at Police Station-Umariyapan, District-Katni (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318, 316(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is a salesman in PDS Shop Village Mudwari. On 15.9.2024 inspection was made by Junior Supply Officer, Dheemarkheda and on physical verification deficiency of wheat - 293 quintals and rice - 424 quintals. Counsel for the applicant submits that inspection was made on the basis of POS machine and not on physical basis. During the Corona period, as per the instructions of Government of Madhya Pradesh, food items were supplied to the eligible persons and that amount of Cereals/ food has not been reduced while Signature Not Verified counting the availability of food items in the shop, in the explanation dated 10.10.2024, he has clearly raised this fact but without being any enquiry on that point criminal case has been lodged by the SDO Dheemarkheda. Counsel for the applicant submits relying on the order passed in WP No. 41135/24 that the food grains and other items were supplied through PDS till 2019 and on the basis of entry in POS machine, shortage has been calculated but, it has not been calculated as per the direction of the State Govt. At the time of Covid-19 period, the food articles were supplied to the beneficiaries on physical mode and no POS machine was used at that time and this process was not approved by the Central Govt. and after that as per the instructions, the cases are being lodged against the PDS salesman. In WP No. 41135/24, the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in order dated 09-01-2025 has considered all these aspects. Hence, the applicant be given the benefit of anticipatory bail.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that no ground of interference is made out as it is a clear cut case of embezzlement, hence, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.

4. Heard the submissions and perused the case diary.

5. Having considered the submissions, prima facie, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the application is allowed with a condition that the applicant shall co-operate with the investigating agency Signature Not Verified including supply of documents, which are in the possession of the applicant, on demand by the investigating agency and also, if required give the sample of thumb and writing and make search and seizure and to open the place of storage in reasonable time when required by the police authorities during investigation. He shall regularly appear before the Court and during trial he will not directly or indirectly threaten or influence any prosecution witnesses.

6. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for his appearance before him during the course of investigation or before the trial Court concerned during trial, as the case may be.

7. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

8. Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.

(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)

JUDGE mrs. mishra Signature Not Verified