IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16967 of 2025 ======================================================

Karu Pasi @ Karu Chaudhari, Male, Son of Late Radho Pasi @ Radho Chaudhari, Resident of Village - Akauna Bazar, Police Station- Mufassil, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Registration, Excise and Prohibition Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Nawada, Bihar.

3. The Additional District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Nawada, Bihar.

4. The Superintendent of Police, Nawada, Bihar.

5. The Circle Officer, Nawada, Bihar.

6. The S.H.O., Excise Police Station, Nawada, Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Jai Prabhat Kishore, AC to SC 13 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)

Date: 16-02-2026 The present writ petition has been filed for de-sealing and release of the house of the petitioner situated at Mauza- Akauna Minhai, P.S.-Mufassil, District-Nawada, appertaining to Khata No.-32, Khesra No.-216, admeasuring 7 decimal which has been sealed in connection with Nawada Excise P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the confiscation proceedings initiated by the respondents vide Case No.15 of 2025, which is pending consideration before the learned Court of Additional District Magistrate, Nawada.

2. The brief facts of the case are that one Nawada Excise P.S. Case No.36 of 2025 dated 19.01.2025 was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2016’) against one Pappu Chaudhary (son of the petitioner) on account of recovery of 5 liters of illicit country made liquor from one room situated in the aforesaid house of the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not been made an accused in the aforesaid criminal case and moreover, the petitioner is not having any connection with the illicit liquor seized from the room of the house of the petitioner in question. It is also submitted that the petitioner cannot be saddled with the liability of the act committed by his son, inasmuch as he was neither having any knowledge about the illicit liquor having been stacked by his son nor any material has been brought forward on the records of the case to show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence. It is thus submitted that the house in question be released in favor of the petitioner and the confiscation proceedings be quashed.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-State has submitted that a raid was conducted in the house in question and from one room of the said house five liters of illicit country made liquor has been recovered, hence the room in question was sealed, whereafter confiscation proceedings have been rightly initiated. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not yet filed any application for release of the premises in question upon payment of penalty under Rule 12 A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022, hence as and when the same is filed, appropriate decision shall definitely be taken. Nonetheless, at this juncture, upon a query being put to the learned counsel for the respondents as to whether any proof has been brought on record in the counter affidavit to show either the connivance or direct/indirect involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence, the answer is in the negative.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record from which it is apparent that the present case arises out of Nawada Excise P.S. Case No.36 of 2025 dated 1