Biranj Chaudhary @ Viran Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9631 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1245 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Biranj Chaudhary @ Viran Chaudhary S/O Santan Chaudhary R/O villageBhadeji, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 1245 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police received information that illegal liquor was being manufactured in village Bhadeji Tand. Acting on this information, the informant along with his associates reached the village and conducted a raid in a mango orchard. During the raid, 20 liters of illicit country-made liquor and 2 kg of Salmoniac tablets were recovered. Further, approximately 1800 liters of semi-prepared illicit liquor was found at the spot and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9631 of 2026(3) dt.07-04-2026 2/3 was destroyed.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the name of this petitioner has surfaced on the statement of local chowkidar. He was not apprehended at the place of occurrence. Nothing was recovered from the possession of this petitioner. He also submits that the witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 06.12.2025.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of two cases.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-I, Gaya Jee in connection with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9631 of 2026(3) dt.07-04-2026 3/3 Muffasil P.S. Case No. 1245 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T