Patna High Court

Indal Chaudhary @ Lotha ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner, directing release upon furnishing the prescribed bond and sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Indal Chaudhary, was charged under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged possession of 22 litres of liquor and large quantities of jawa mahua seized from his residence, which is a joint family property. He was not arrested at the scene and the seized items were not found in his conscious possession. The petitioner argued that the case was based on secret information and that he would not abscond, having been in custody since December 2025. The State opposed bail, but the court noted the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the contraband and the joint ownership of the house. Consequently, the court ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, and allowed the bail application.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act given the circumstances of alleged possession and joint family ownership of the property.

Legislation cited

Excise Act — s. 30(a)

Subjects

bail
Excise Act
liquor possession
joint family property
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16678 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-276 Year-2024 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Indal Chaudhary @ Lotha Chaudhary S/o- Late Sanichar Chaudhary R/v-
                 Naiki Ps- Rafiganj Dist- Aurangabad
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Santosh Kumar Pandey
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 22 litres of liquor from house of

                   the petitioner along with 150 litres of jawa mahua which was

                   destroyed and 350 litres of jawa mahua was destroyed from two

                   different places.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in

                   question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged

                   with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16678 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
                                                           2/2




                         in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his

                         knowledge and he came to be implicated based on secret

                         information, which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is

                         next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating

                         innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,

                         secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical

                         manner without holding a proper investigation. It is further

                         submitted that petitioner is in custody since 06.12.2025. It is

                         also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will

                         cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.

                                      5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.

                                      6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                         counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is

                         directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail-

                         bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with

                         two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                         learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in

                         connection with Rafiganj P. S. Case No.276 of 2024.

                                      7. The application stands allowed.


                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…