IMPORTANT POINT
Confiscation orders must provide reasons and allow affected parties the opportunity to be heard, or they will be deemed invalid.

JUDGMENT :

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.2.2025, passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Department-cum-Presiding Officer, Aurangabad in connection with Confiscation Case No. 46/2024, whereby and whereunder an order for confiscation of the vehicle of the petitioner bearing Registration No. JH-03AC-8034 has been passed along with the order to confiscate 24 other vehicles.

2. The brief facts of the case are that one Amba P.S. Case No. 49/2024 was lodged on 15.3.2024 under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2016”) against one Chandan Kumar Sharma and owner of white colour Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No. JH-03AC-8034, which in fact belongs to the petitioner, on account of recovery of 700 liters of spirit from the said vehicle.

3. The learned Court of Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Department-cum-Presiding Officer, Aurangabad had initiated confiscation proceedings qua the vehicle of the petitioner and other vehicles and a composite order of confiscation, pertaining to 25 vehicles has been passed as also it has been directed to get the valuation of the said vehicles done, whereafter action be taken to auction the same.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that first of all, no reason has been assigned in the impugned order dated 19.2.2025 for confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner, apart from a bald statement with regard to all the 25 vehicles that liquor was recovered from the said vehicles and even after notice, no person / owner of the vehicles has come and put forth their defence, hence the vehicles are being confiscated. It is further submitted that no notice was given to the petitioner so as to enable him to put forth his defence before the confiscating authority, hence the order dated 19.2.2025 is perverse and fit to be set aside. Nonetheless, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to pay penalty for getting his vehicle released, by filing appropriate petition under Section 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as to “the Rules, 2023”).

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the State has referred to the counter affidavit, filed in the present case and has submitted that notice was issued to the owner of the vehicles in question through registered post, however the petitioner had failed to appear in the confiscation proceedings, leading to passing of an ex parte order dated 19.2.2025. Nonetheless, the learned counsel for the Respondent-State has fairly admitted that no separate reason has been furnished in the impugned order dated 19.2.2025 for confiscation of the vehicle of the petitioner.

6 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. At the outset, we would gainfully reproduce Section 58 of the Act, 2016 hereinbelow:-

“58. Confiscation by District Collector.-

(1). Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, where anything liable for confiscation under this Act is seized or detained under the provisions of this Act, the officer seizing and detaining such property shall, without any reasonable delay submit a report to the District Collector who has jurisdiction over the said area;

(2). On receipt of the report under sub-section (1), the District Collector if satisfied that an offence under this Act has been committed, may, whether or not prosecution is instituted for the commission of such an offence and whether or not a case is pending before any court, order confiscation of such property;

(3). The Collector shall, before passing an order under sub-section (2), give a reasonable opportunity to the person conce