Shubham Kumar vs. The State Of Jharkhand

Facts

The petitioner, Shubham Kumar, is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No. 60 of 2025, registered under sections 316(2)/318(4)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The petitioner and the informant were in a business relationship, with an agreement for the supply of trolleys by the petitioner. The petitioner claims to have supplied the trolleys as per the agreement and has annexed the factory gate-pass as evidence. The allegation against the petitioner is that the trolleys were not supplied within the stipulated time. The State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, citing the allegations of non-supply.

Held

The Court, after considering the contents of the FIR, the existence of an agreement for the supply of trolleys, and the annexed documents including the GST Certificate, quotation, cheque, and factory gate-pass, found that the matter arose out of an agreement. In light of these facts and circumstances, the Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to surrender before the learned court within four weeks and, upon surrender or arrest, to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Chandil. The conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023, were to be adhered to.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in light of the allegations of breach of contract and non-supply of goods, considering the documents annexed by the petitioner? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends that there was a business agreement for the supply of trolleys, which has been fulfilled, and that the gate-pass of the factory from where the trolleys were taken out supports his claim. He argues that these facts warrant the grant of anticipatory bail. Revenue/State's arguments: The State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, stating that allegations of non-supply of trolleys have been made against the petitioner.