Anil Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50638 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-377 Year-2021 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Anil Chaudhary S/o Late Ram Prasad Chaudhary Resident Of VillageGondapur, P.S.- Nawada, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Amitesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nawada (Town) P.S. Case No. 377 of 2021 registered for the offences under Sections 33, 34 and 36 of the Excise Act.
3. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 12.08.2024.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is to be engage in manufacturing of spurious liquor alongwith other co-accused persons, wherein after consumption of said spurious liquor one person died.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of confessional statement as made by co-accused namely Manti Devi and Arvind Yadav, in furtherance of which no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50638 of 2025(3) dt.19-09-2025 2/3 incriminating material was recovered/surfaced during the course of investigation, which may connect petitioner with the said occurrence or allegation as to deal with spurious liquor. It is further submitted that petitioner found involved in 13 more cases of similar nature and out of suspicion arising out of said criminal antecedents he was also implicated with the present case without having any connecting evidence. It is pointed out that in maximum number of cases his name transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused as of present case, having otherwise no evidentiary value.
It is pointed out that petitioner and man who died are from same locality and are known to each other, therefore merely on the basis of CDRs they cannot be said to be involved in manufacturing and selling of spurious liquor or to draw any conspiracy. While concluding the argument it is submitted that investigation has been completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, while opposing the prayer for bail fairly conceded that petitioner is not named in the FIR.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances as mentioned above as save and except suspicion arising out of confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50638 of 2025(3) dt.19-09-2025 3/3 statement of co-accused Manti Devi and Arvind Yadav, primafacie, nothing incriminating appears against this petitioner, coupled with the fact as petitioner remains in custody since 12.08.2024, accordingly, petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Nawada (Town) P.S. Case No. 377 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge-1st, Nawada/concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./ 480(3) of the BNSS. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T