Madhuresh Prasad, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner’s vehicle (Wagon R) bearing registration No. BR-01EV-5108, was seized on 01.12.2020, in connection with Excise Case No. 98 of 2020, near Bhaljor check post during routine checking. There is alleged recovery of 750 ml of ‘Bacardi Rum’ and 500 ml ‘Kingfisher strong bear’, allegedly, total quantity of illicit liquor recovered is 1.250 litres.

3. The vehicle was subjected to confiscation proceedings in Confiscation (Excise) Case No. 625 of 2020-21, before the Collector Banka. The petitioner appeared in the confiscation proceeding before the Confiscating Authority. His case before the Confiscating Authority was that his brother had taken the vehicle for going to Deoghar. On the way back, he had an altercation with police at the check post, which led to his false implication on extraneous considerations.

4. The vehicle was confiscated on 25.01.2021, (Annexure- 3) to the writ petition. The Excise Commissioner vide order dated 14.04.2021, as contained in Annexure- 4 to the writ petition, passed in Excise Appeal Case No. 195 of 2021, filed by the petitioner, remanded the matter back to the Collector Banka for passing an order afresh after hearing the petitioner within a stipulated time frame (30 days).

5. During pendency of the appeal, the petitioner’s vehicle was auction sold by the Collector Banka, under order dated 22.06.2021 (Annexure- 5). The purchaser of the vehicle has thus been impleaded as Respondent No. 6 in the present writ proceedings, and earlier notices were issued to him.

6. The Office has reported valid service of notice, which was received by his wife.

7. It is the case of the petitioner, that sale of the vehicle during appeal proceeding is mala fide. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vehicle could not have been auction sold during pendency of the appeal. The petitioner claims to be an ex-Army personnel. It is his specific case that he had suffered a non fatal battle casualty, while performing operational duty in operation ‘PARAKRAM’. In view of his injury, he has purchased the vehicle in-question, as otherwise his movement would have been very difficult.

8. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that illicit liquor was recovered from the petitioner’s vehicle. Such recovery rendered the vehicle liable to seizure and confiscation. After confiscation proceedings, vehicle vested in the Collector, who, has rightly auction sold the vehicle. After due instructions, he is not in a position to deny that the auction sale of the vehicle in-question took place at a time when the petitioner’s appeal was pending before the Excise Commissioner.

9. The provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, (for brevity ‘the Act’) applicable at the relevant time with respect to confiscation and the Collector’s power to auction the vehicle are provided in Sections 56, 57, 58, 61 and 92 of the Act.

10. Sections 56 and 61 relevant to the instant case is worth reproducing, the same read as follows:—

[56. Things Liable for confiscation.—Whenever an offence has been committed, which is punishable under this Act.—

(a) any intoxicant or liquor unlawfully imported, transported, manufactured, sold, stored, possessed, material, utensil, implement, apparatus, package or covering and or the other contents, if any, of such receptacle, package or covering for the purposes of storing, manufacturing or labelling such intoxicant or liquor;

(b) any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for carrying any intoxicant or liquor; or

(c) any premises or part thereof that my have been used for storing or manufacturing any liquor or intoxicant or for committing any other offence under this Act;

shall be liable to be confiscated in a manner prescribed under the provisions of the Act,

(d) The State Government, if deem necessary, may issue necessary directions, guidelines, Regulations and instructions with respect to