Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
P. B. BAJANTHRI and ARUN KUMAR JHA, JJ.
CWJC No. 17894 of 2022
(14.9.2023)
Sunita Sinha ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 – Sections 30(a) and 56 – Recovery of foreign liquor – Sealing of godown – Though premises owned by petitioner may be involved in storage of illicit liquor, apparently involvement of petitioner is not so forthcoming from facts and circumstances of case – Petitioner, a lady, is a resident of Dhanbad (Jharkhand) where she has been residing during relevant time – Production of lease/rent deeds clearly reveal letting out of premises – Petitioner cannot be declared guilty even before conclusion of trial and it goes against established canons of law that a person is presumed to be innocent till proven guilty – Confiscating authority, appellate authority and revisional authority committed error and failed to discharge duty cast upon them while passing impugned orders in absence of any direct or indirect evidence against petitioner – Petitioner could not be made to suffer for being landlord/owner of premises in question if recovery of some liquor has been made – Impugned orders set aside – Respondent authorities directed to release godown in favour of petitioner henceforth – Writ petition allowed with cost of Rs.50,000/- to paid to petitioner by official respondents. (Paras 12, 24, 25 and 26)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 – Rules 12B, 13B and 14 – Recovery of liquor – Sealing of premises – Premises can be seized and even confiscated and auctioned merely upon its involvement in any offence under the Act – This is a draconian provision and so it must be used with complete circumspection – Existing provisions of the Act gives unfettered and unguided and arbitrary powers to the authorities – In absence of any specific guidelines, such powers can be abused or misused – Provisions of law as framed under the Act does not appear to be perfect law and suffers from a number of infirmities. (Paras 15 and 23)
Arun Kumar Jha, J. – Learned counsels for the respective parties have been heard on the last date of hearing.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking the following reliefs: –
“(i) For issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, direction/ directions or orders/order especially in the nature of Certiorari, for quashing the order dated 02.09.2022 passed by Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department, Government of Bihar (Res. No.-2) in Excise Revision No.-194/2022 in connection with Excise Appeal Case No. 362/2022 (arising out of Excise Confiscation Case No. 3138/2022), to the extent, whereby and whereunder while allowing the premises in question owned by petitioner to be released (as the same was confiscated in connection with Excise Case being Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No.-259/2020) in her favor, has directed to make payment of Rs. 10,00,000/-(Rs. Ten Lakh Only), which is very exorbitant and unreasonable.
(ii) The petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, direction/directions or orders/order especially in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order dated 27/06/2022 passed by Excise Commissioner (Res. No.-3), in Excise Appeal Case No.-362/2022, whereby and where under appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected and order of confiscation dated 16.03.2022 passed by the Collector in Excise Confiscation Case No. 3138/2022 was confirmed.
(iii) The petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, direction/ directions or orders/order especially in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order dated 16.03.2022 passed by the Collector in Excise Confiscation Case No. 3138/2022 whereby and whereunder the premises in question owned by petitioner was ordered to be confiscated in connection with Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No.-259/2020) as being owner of the property and it was her responsibility to ensure that her premises is not being used for any unauthorized business.
(iv) The petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, direction/ directions or orders/order especially in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to release the Godown having been constructed upon the land appertaining to Khata No.-41, Plot-379, Mauza- Jakriyapur, Thana- Patna City under the Ram Krishna Nagar Police Station, Patna in favour of the Petitioner, which was confiscated by Respondents in connection with Ram Krishna Nagar P.S. Case No.-259/2020 dated 03.09.2020 registered under section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, as the petitioner is a lawful owner of the Godown and had leased out the said premises, pursuant to an agreement dated 29.07.2020.
(v) For any other relief/reliefs, which the Hon'ble court may grant in general interest, that may be deemed appropriate and necessary in this case.
3. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner is as follows:
The petitioner is resident of Dhanbad, who has been staying with her husband, who was Deputy General Manager (Excav), Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad and retired on 31.03.2022. The petitioner is the owner of a godown situated on an area of 1 Katha 10 Dhur bearing Khata No. 41, Plot No.379, Mauza-Jakriyapur, Thana-Patna City situated under Ram Krishna Nagar Police Station which she let out on lease in the year 2016 to one M/s Saarthak Vanijya India Limited and the deed of lease was executed on 19.05.2016. Thereafter, in the year 2020, the aforesaid premises was given on rent to one Akash Kumar for 11 months and the deed of rent was executed on 29.07.2020 and the tenant had been using the godown since the date of agreement of the parties.
4. Further case of the petitioner is that she was very cautious about the use of premises given on rent and clear stipulation has been made in the agreement that the tenant would not do any illegal work in the godown and would follow the laws and regulations of the government and in case of any failure, the tenant was to be solely liable for the c
Confiscation of properties under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act requires proof of owner's involvement in the offense; a lack of such proof invalidates the confiscation.
Confiscation of a vehicle under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act requires evidence of the owner's consent or involvement in illegal activities; failure to establish this renders confiscation inva....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for timely initiation and conclusion of confiscation proceedings under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, emphasizing the importance of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for timely initiation and conclusion of confiscation proceedings under the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016, and the amendment allowin....
The need for expeditious implementation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, and the issuance of specific directions to ensure the initiation and conclusion of confiscation proceedings with....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
