Patna High Court
Ajay ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as there was no corroborative material beyond the accomplice’s statement and the statutory conditions for denial were not met.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Choudhary, applied for anticipatory bail in a case where police recovered 330 litres of illicit country-made liquor near the Sone river and an arrested accomplice, Ravi Yadav, named him as a co‑conspirator under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The petitioner argued that, apart from the accomplice’s statement, there was no material linking him to the offence and that the seizure occurred in an open public place, lacking the ingredients required under Section 76(2) of the same Act. The State contended that the recovery of a large consignment and the accomplice’s testimony justified denial of anticipatory bail, citing an express bar in the statute. The Court examined the evidential record, noted the absence of any other incriminating material, and held that mere accusation by an accomplice without corroboration cannot defeat a bail application. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and the condition that one bailor be a close family member, with compliance to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be denied solely on the basis of an accomplice's testimony without corroborative material.
- Whether the ingredients of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 are satisfied to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the recovery of illicit liquor from an open public place constitutes sufficient ground to refuse anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition law
- evidentiary standards
- Section 76(2)
- bail conditions
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36275 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2026 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ajay Choudhary S/o Late Manikchand Choudhary R/o Village - Tillouthu,
Uttar Patti, P.S - Tillouthu, District - Rohtas, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 02-06-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through
virtual mode.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Tillouthu P.S. Case No. 84 of 2026, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
3. Acting on a tip off, regarding trade of illicit wine
and its concealment, the police conducted raid near the bank of
Sone river and apprehended one ‘Ravi Yadav’. The apprehended
person disclosed the name of the petitioner and others as
accomplice. In course of search, total 330 liters country made
liquor was recovered.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36275 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026
2/3
save and except the disclosure made by the apprehended person,
there is no material suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in
crime. Even as per the FIR, it is the admitted position that the
alleged recovery has been made near the bank of Sone river,
which is an open place, easily accessible to all. There is no other
ingredients attracting the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act; besides the
violation of mandatory provision of Sections 103 and 105 of the
BNSS.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that besides
the recovery of huge consignment of illicit liquor, the
apprehended person disclosed the name of the petitioner and
further there is an express bar to maintain anticipatory bail in
such cases.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced on
behalf of the learned Advocate for the respective parties and
taking note of the fact that the alleged recovery has been made
from an open place and there is no other material suggesting the
complicity of the petitioner; save and except the disclosure
made by the apprehended person as also the lack of any
ingredients attracting the rigors provided under Section 76(2) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36275 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026
3/3
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act; all the
more, mere antecedent of a person cannot be the sole ground to
reject his prayer for anticipatory bail, unless there is other
cogent material, let the petitioner above named be released on
bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court
below within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special
Judge Excise, Court No.-II, Rohtas, Sasaram in connection with
Tillouthu P.S. Case No. 84 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors
shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.