SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Pat) 123

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
Cr. WJC No.911 of 2017
(3.1.2023)
Hira Kumar Singh ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents

Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh.
For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, GA-1.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vikas Kumar, SC-1.

Headnote:

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 – Sections 13, 30 and 35(c) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 420/34 – Constitution of India – Articles 226 and 227 – Seizure of suspected alcoholic fluid marketed by petitioner in which approximately 0.4 per cent ethyl alcohol was noticed – To attract penal provisions of Section 30(a) or 30(g) of Act, substance must be of intoxicant or liquor which can serve as an alcohol or for a substitute of alcohol and is used or likely to be used or consumed for the purposes of getting intoxicated – State Legislature has competency to make law only in respect of potable liquors and not in respect of non-potable liquors – Statutory provisions cannot be read in isolation to gather aim and object of Legislature in bringing Law in force – If Legislature would have intended to put complete prohibition even on non-alcoholic beverage as per standard of BIS, there was no need to incorporate clarification in form of definition of word "alcoholic beverage or portable liquor" under Section 2(4) of Act – Only definition under Section 2(3) of Act was enough to fulfill the desire. (Paras 14 and 20)

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 – Sections 13, 30 and 35(c) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 420/34 – Constitution of India – Articles 226 and 227 – Seizure of suspected alcoholic fluid – What the Act prohibits is intoxicant or liquor containing alcohol of any strength and purity – Simultaneously, it does not prohibit sale of non-alcoholic substances in conformity with standard set by BIS – In present case, only ethyl alcohol of 0.4 per cent has been found by expert – Penal provision must be specific with all clarity – Petitioner was selling non-alcoholic substance, according to BIS standard – It cannot be said that petitioner has committed any offence under Act – If FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence, it would be fit to be quashed for reason that its continuance would amount to abuse of process of law and would occasion failure of justice – FIR quashed – Writ Application allowed. (Paras 21 to 25)

Chandra Shekhar Jha, J. – Heard, Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha GA-1, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State as well as Mr. Vikas Kumar SC-1, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This present writ application is being filed for following reliefs under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India: –

(i) For quashing of Gaighat (Benibad O.P.) P.S. Case No. 20 of 2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered for offences under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 35(c) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (Contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application)

(ii) For restraining Respondents from interfering in the trade of the petitioner in the garb of regulating the business in exercise of power conferred under Bihar Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

(iii) For any other relief (s) for which the petitioner found entitled too.

3. As gathered from the fact of this case, it appears that petitioner has obtained distributorship of products manufactured by M/s D.D. Food Products, Nagloi, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi through M/s Smart India Marketing in the year 2016 as it is appearing from Annexure- 1 of the writ petition, running his office at Anand Nagar, Gulzarbagh, Patna, having marketing right for entire State of Bihar.

4. It appears that M/s D.D. Food Product manufactures, produces different products, including soft non-alcoholic beverage, where manufacturing products were made available after complying with legal formalities duly approved by Food Safety Regulators, where manufacturer M/s D. D. Food Products obtained food safety license number 1331300700037. It also appears that M/s Smart India Marketing, before starting its marketing in Bihar got examined the products from the officials of Excise Department i.e. from Excise Chemist Inspector, Bihar, where on chemical analysis product in issue found non-alcholic by Chemist of Excise Department vide Memo No. 4409 dated 29.12.2016, as forwarded its chemical analyst report to Sub- Inspector of Excise, as per Annexure-2.

5. After making all legal formalities in this connection, the petitioner obtained 200 cases of non-alcoholic beverage from Smart India Marketing on payment of Rs. 1,80,000/- on 30.12.2016 and sent the consignment from Patna to his shop at Darbhanga for the purpose of distribution to various retail shops in the district of Darbhanga. But while the goods were in transition, the truck carrying goods was intercepted by the police officials of Gaighat (Benibad O.P) on suspicion in the night of 04.01.2017/05.01.2017 and for the same a Sanha No. 64/17 dated 05.01.2017 was lodged. The sample was send to Chemist Investigator, Patna, where report dated 12.01.2017 was made available suggesting that said fruit juice bear having content of ethyl alcohol only 0.4% but ignoring all such chemical analysis and settled principles, police lodged FIR, which has been registered as Gaighat (Bandipur O.P) P.S. Case No. 20 of 2017 dated 10.02.2017 under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 35(C) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 saying that petitioner has been selling King Farmer Premium Super Strong Fun Ship Beer in the market and claiming the same to be real beer.

6. The petitioner has annexed a report which is annexed as Annexure-6 in the present application in respect of chemical examination of certain samples of Chemist Analyst, Patna, of suspected alcoholic fluid marketed by the petitioner, in which approximately 0.4 per cent ethyl alcohol was noticed.

7. Learned counsel submits that the respondents have imposed complete prohibition on sale, possession or consumption of liquor w.e.f. 05.04.2016 in order to effectively enforce the policy of zero tolerance towards enforcement/implementation of the Act. The aim and object of the Act would

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top