Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, ARUN KUMAR JHA
Shambhu Nath Rai Son of Hari Krishna Rai – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Government of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. vehicle seized with meagre illicit liquor quantity. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. penalty exorbitant; ignores quantity, depreciation, owner non-involvement. (Para 3) |
| 3. rules mandate considering quantity, owner involvement, economic status. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. exorbitant penalty quashed; reduced to reasonable rs.10,000 for release. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 04.06.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gopalganj Sadar in Excise Confiscation Case No. 264 of 2025 (arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 40 of 2025) whereby and whereunder the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gopalganj has fixed a sum equivalent to the insured value of the vehicle in question i.e. a sum of Rs. 3,80,000/- as penalty amount for the purposes of release of the vehicle in question.
2. The brief facts of the case as per the First Information Report bearing Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 40 of 2025 dated 15.02.2025, registered under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2016’), against two persons, namely Indrajeet Patel and Ramnath Gupta is that on 15.02.2025 at
Penalty for vehicle release in excise seizure cases must consider meagre liquor quantity, lack of owner involvement, and insurance value; full insured amount exorbitant without regular illicit use ev....
The court determined a penalty under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act must be reasonable, referencing Rule 12A for vehicle release conditions.
Refusal to release a vehicle carrying liquor solely based on quantity violates Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, unless public interest is clearly established.
Penalty imposition must comply with statutory provisions; unauthorized penalties for vehicle seizure exceed legal authority and are impermissible.
The court ruled that confiscation orders must comply with statutory provisions regarding seizure and penalty, and that prior judgments must be considered.
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
