Patna High Court

Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 11 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjeet Chaudhary, was implicated in a 2014 case (G.O. No. 296) under Section 47(a)(f) of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 for alleged possession of 90 litres of country-made liquor and 1000 kg of fermented Mahua. He claimed he was unaware of the proceedings, asserting that the alleged contraband was located at a canal bank and that no notice or service report had been served. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing false implication and lack of due process. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the absence of a service report and the petitioner's lack of knowledge of the case. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the CrPC.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the petitioner claims lack of service of process and ignorance of the pending case under the Bihar Excise Act.

Legislation cited

Bihar Excise Act, 1915 — s. 47(a)(f)
Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
service of process
Bihar Excise Act
Criminal Procedure Code
Section 47
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46948 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2014 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                     District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o- Rambriksha Chaudhary Village-
                 Pesh,P.S- Nardiganj, Dist- Nawada

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr.Akhilesh Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Shailendra Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
                 PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   11-02-2026              Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for

                   the State.

                            2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in G.O. Case No.

                   296 of 2014 registered under Section 47(a)(f) of Bihar Excise Act,

                   1915.

                           3. The case was lodged under old Excise Act in the year, 2014

                   with allegation that 90 litres of country-made liquor and 1000 kgs. of

                   fermented Mahua was recovered from the premises of the petitioner.

                         4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

                   petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case.

                   The place wherefrom the alleged recovery was made was not in

                   possession of the petitioner rather it is at the bank of a canal. He

                   submitted that the petitioner was not aware of this case as no notice

                   or summons was received by him. Learned counsel has submitted
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46948 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      further that in compliance of the order dated 04-08-2025 passed by a

                      coordinate bench, the entire order sheets of the lower court record

                      have been received, from perusal of which, it appears that though the

                      processes were issued against the petitioner but there is no service

                      report.

                                   6. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for

                      anticipatory bail.

                                7. It appears that the petitioner was not aware of pendency of

                      the case against him. The xerox copies of the order sheets of the

                      records of learned lower court have been received in compliance of

                      the order of the co-ordinate bench, which shows that there is no

                      service report of the process issued against the petitioner.

                                   8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let

                      the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before

                      the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today, be

                      released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-

                      (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                      satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court-2, Nawada in

                      connection with G.O. Case No. 296 of 2014, subject to the conditions

                      as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal

                      Procedure.



A.K.V.//-                                  (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…