Former Excise Commissioner Amit Prakash was arrested by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in connection with a liquor scam in Jharkhand on June 17, 2025. His arrest followed a day of questioning and comes shortly after the detention of another senior IAS officer, Vinay Kumar Choubey, who was implicated in the same case. Choubey is accused of causing a loss of ₹38 crore to the State exchequer through corrupt practices.

Amit Prakash is alleged to have authorized a payment of approximately ₹12 crore to a liquor wholesaler named Om Sai despite existing allegations against the company and government directives that payments should be withheld. This payment occurred shortly before his retirement from his position as Commissioner of the Excise Department and Managing Director of the Jharkhand State Beverage Corporation Limited (JSBCL) in December 2024.

With Prakash's arrest, six individuals have now been detained in relation to this case. The ACB has also arrested Gajendra Singh, Joint Commissioner of the Excise Department. The opposition party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has called for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into these matters, alleging that ACB's actions are merely superficial.

The investigation centers around accusations that the 2022 Jharkhand liquor policy was designed to benefit certain syndicates unlawfully, leading to substantial losses for the state treasury. Following his interrogation and subsequent arrest, Prakash was taken for medical examination at Sadar Hospital in Ranchi.

Original article

The provided text is replete with various forms of bias and language manipulation, which will be thoroughly analyzed below.

One of the most striking aspects of the text is its overt political bias, which leans heavily towards a centrist or liberal perspective. The use of phrases such as "liquor scam" and "corrupt practices" creates a negative connotation towards the accused individuals and implies that they are guilty without providing concrete evidence. This framing is typical of liberal or centrist media outlets, which often prioritize sensationalism over nuance. The text also fails to provide a balanced view by not mentioning any potential mitigating circumstances or alternative explanations for the alleged corruption.

The text also exhibits cultural bias in its assumption that corruption is inherently bad and that those who engage in it are morally reprehensible. This assumption is rooted in Western values and ignores the complexities of corruption in non-Western contexts. For instance, some cultures view corruption as a necessary evil or even a form of social lubricant. By failing to acknowledge these nuances, the text reinforces a Western-centric worldview that prioritizes transparency and accountability above all else.

Furthermore, the text exhibits linguistic bias through its use of emotionally charged language, such as "scam" and "corrupt practices." These words create a sense of outrage and indignation in the reader, which can influence their perception of the events described. Additionally, the text uses passive constructions to obscure agency, stating that Amit Prakash "authorized" a payment rather than taking direct responsibility for it. This framing shifts attention away from Prakash's individual actions and towards his position within an institution.

The selection and omission bias in this text are also noteworthy. The author chooses to highlight certain facts while omitting others that might provide context or alternative perspectives. For example, there is no mention of any potential benefits to Jharkhand's economy from liquor sales or any efforts made by previous administrations to address corruption within government agencies. By selectively presenting information, the author creates an unbalanced narrative that reinforces their preconceived notions about corruption.

Structural bias is evident in the way institutions are portrayed as inherently trustworthy while individuals are held accountable for their actions within those institutions. The ACB (Anti-Corruption Bureau) is presented as an impartial arbiter without question or critique, whereas Amit Prakash's actions are scrutinized extensively without consideration for systemic factors that may have contributed to his behavior.

Confirmation bias is also present throughout this text as it uncritically accepts assumptions about corruption without questioning them further. There is no attempt made to explore alternative explanations for alleged wrongdoing; instead, every detail seems designed solely to reinforce pre-existing notions about corrupt officials exploiting public resources for personal gain.

Framing bias plays out through story structure where narrative emphasis on arrests makes readers perceive current developments more significant than past events like 2022 liquor policy formulation when real issues were created but ignored now due largely because they do not fit neatly into current narratives around 'corruption'.

Lastly temporal biases emerge when looking at how historical context shapes our understanding today - particularly regarding governance systems & accountability mechanisms put into place decades ago; however these aspects receive little attention here instead focusing solely on recent happenings reinforcing presentist views over long-term implications