In Brief
The Supreme Court addressed multiple appeals concerning anticipatory bail granted to rice millers accused of misappropriating paddy and failing to return rice in their milling agreements with Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation. The key issue was whether the Corporation's demand for bank guarantees equivalent to the alleged defalcated amounts was justified. The Court held that its February 2017 order conditioning bail on furnishing bank guarantees referred only to guarantees required by the original milling agreements, not additional security for alleged losses. Where millers had pledged immovable property as contractual alternatives, demanding additional bank guarantees was unjustified. Consequently, orders cancelling bail merely for non-furnishing of defalcation-based guarantees were quashed. However, failure to maintain bank guarantees actually contractually required remained valid ground for bail cancellation.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.