Patna High Court
Dhutar Chaudhary @ Ghutar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, three Chaudhary brothers, were arrested on 14‑12‑2025 in connection with a FIR alleging extortion of Rs 20,000 per bigha, threats, and firing on the informant's family, under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Act, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. They claim the allegations are false, arising from a land dispute, and assert that the informant is not the rightful landowner. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting the petitioners' multiple prior criminal antecedents. The High Court considered the nature of the allegations, the lack of ownership by the informant, and the petitioners' custody status, and ordered bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed verification of criminal antecedents without delaying the release.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite serious charges of extortion, threats, and use of firearms.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
- Whether the land ownership dispute and alleged falsehood of the FIR affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- bail
- extortion
- land dispute
- criminal antecedents
- Arms Act
- Bihar Negotiable Act
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27805 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2025 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Dhutar Chaudhary @ Ghutar Chaudhary Son of Late Sulendra Chaudhary
Resident of Vill -Jheema Ps -Morkahi Dist- Khagaria
2. Chanchal Chaudhary Son of Late Sulendra Chaudhary Resident of Vill
-Jheema Ps -Morkahi Dist- Khagaria
3. Varun Chaudhary Son of Late Rajo Chaudhary Resident of Vill -Jheema Ps
-Morkahi Dist- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh No. I, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
For the Informant : Ms. Seema Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh No. I, learned counsel
for the petitioners, Ms. Seema Kumari, learned counsel for the
informant and Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since
14.12.2025 in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No. 176 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 05.12.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(3), 303(2), 308(5), 126(2), 351(2)
and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, these petitioners
along with other accused persons have demanded Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27805 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
2/4
20,000/bigha as extortion money from the informant and
threatened him if he fails to pay the same. It is further alleged
that the accused persons open fired upon the family members of
the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in
the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false
and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any
offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From perusal of the F.I.R it
appears that petitioners and other accused persons have
demanded Rs. 20,000 per bigha as extortion money from the
informant. He further submits that in fact, the land in question
belongs to the co-accused Dharamlal Chaudhary and due to this
land dispute the present occurrence has taken place. He further
submits that the said Dharamlal along with other accused
persons including these petitioners have gone to the said land
and due to this very reason the informant has lodged the present
false case against them. He further submits that the police after
investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioners.
The petitioners are in custody since 14.12.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27805 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
3/4
prayer for bail of the petitioners on the ground that petitioner no.
1 carries five criminal antecedents, petitioner no. 2 carries three
criminal antecedents and petitioner no. 3 carries three criminal
antecedents other than the present one.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
as well as the nature of allegation in the FIR and the fact that the
informant is not the land owner as per the Annexure-2 of the
bail petition, let the petitioners, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in
connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No. 176 of 2025, subject to
the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27805 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
4/4
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…