Patna High Court
Santosh ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court denied pre‑arrest bail to petitioner 2 but granted pre‑arrest bail to petitioner 1 subject to conditions.
Summary
Santosh Choudhary and Suganti Devi were implicated in a case where 100 litres of illicit liquor were seized, including 40 litres found in a motorcycle registered in the name of the second petitioner. The petitioners claimed they had no knowledge of the vehicle's use and that the first petitioner’s involvement was based solely on confessional statements of co‑accused, which lack evidentiary value. They sought pre‑arrest bail under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, Section 30(a). The State opposed the bail. The High Court denied pre‑arrest bail to the second petitioner, citing the nature of the allegation and his prior similar offence, but granted bail to the first petitioner subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The bail application was disposed of accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to the second petitioner who is alleged owner of the vehicle used for transporting illicit liquor and has prior similar charges.
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to the first petitioner whose alleged involvement rests only on confessional statements of co‑accused.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- illicit liquor
- vehicle registration
- confessional statements
- prior criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43782 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2026 Thana- DARAUNDA District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Santosh Choudhary (Male) aged about 36 years, Son of Late Rajendra
Choudhary
2. Suganti Devi (Female) aged about 52 years, wife of Late Rajendra
Chaudhary
Both are Resident of Village - Tiyay, P.S - Aandar, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Kumari Anupam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 Heard Mrs. Kumari Anupam, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Suresh Prasad
Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Daraundha P.S. Case No. 179 of 2026 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 30 (a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act as amended up-to-date.
3. Allegation is of recovery of 100 litres of illicit
liquor, out of which, 40 litres of illicit liquor was recovered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43782 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/4
from a motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR29BB-7296,
registered in the name of the petitioner no. 2.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the petitioner no. 2 has been
implicated in the present case on the basis of registration
certificate of the vehicle, which was being used by co-villager
and the petitioner no. 2 had no knowledge that his vehicle was
being misused for carrying illicit liquor. Petitioner no. 1 has
been roped in the present case on the basis of confessional
statement of co-accused persons, namely, Krishna Pasi and Lal
Das Mahto, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law.
Petitioners have no concern with the alleged seized liquor nor
they are involved in trade or manufacturing of illicit liquor in
any manner. Petitioners denied their complicity in the alleged
offence. Petitioner no. 1 has clean antecedent and petitioner no.
2 has one antecedent of similar nature. On these grounds,
petitioners seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the nature of allegation made in the
FIR against the petitioner no. 2 and the previous criminal
antecedents of petitioner no. 2, who has been made accused in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43782 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/4
one other case for similar offence allegedly committed under
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act as amended up-to-date, I am
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner no. 2 on pre-arrest bail.
7. So far as, petitioner no. 1 is concerned, considering
the fact that he has been made accused in the present case on
the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons,
namely, Krishna Pasi and Lal Das Mahto, which has no
evidentiary value in the eye of law. General and omnibus
allegation has been levelled against him and also the fact that
the State has failed to implement its liquor policy in its true
spirit, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on
pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before
the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from
today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is
pending, in connection with Daraundha P.S. Case No. 179 of
2026, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner no. 1 as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner no. 1 as what has been stated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43782 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
4/4
in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
9. The present bail application is disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.