Kaushlendra KumarversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2684 of 2024
    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-635 Year-2023 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna
======================================================
Kaushlendra Kumar S/o Late R.P. Sinha R/o -Village-Gopalpur, P.S.-Bikram,
District- Patna, Bihar.

                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                     Versus
The State of Bihar

                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
                                Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL JUDGMENT
 Date : 06-01-2026

               Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned senior counsel for the

 petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar, learned APP for the State.

               2. The present application has been filed for quashing

 of the First Information Report registered as Gardanibagh P.S.

 Case No. 635 of 2023, instituted for the alleged offence

 punishable under Section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

 Act, 2016.

               3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that while the

 police were on routine night patrolling at about 20:30 hours near

 Anisabad Golambar, information was received regarding

 consumption of liquor at the C.S. Office, Gardanibagh. Upon

 reaching the said place, it is alleged that four to five persons fled
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                            2/7




         from the spot, out of whom two persons were apprehended

         including the petitioner. A breath analyzer test was conducted

         upon him, which allegedly indicated alcohol content of 65 mg

         per 100 ml, whereas the co-accused, namely Upendra Kumar,

         was found to have 0 mg per 100 ml and was accordingly

         released, while the petitioner was taken into custody and the

         present F.I.R. came to be registered.

                      4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits

         that the entire prosecution rests solely on the breath analyzer

         reading, without any confirmatory medical examination by way

         of blood or urine analysis, as the breath analyzer test alone

         cannot conclusively establish consumption of alcohol. It is

         contended that the breath analyzer test is, at best, a preliminary

         screening tool and cannot be treated as substantive evidence of

         consumption of alcohol. It is further submitted that the petitioner

         had been consuming homeopathic medicines and that several

         other extraneous factors such as use of toothpaste, mouthwash,

         breath fresheners, metabolic variations and body temperature are

         known to affect breath analyzer readings, thereby rendering such

         readings unreliable in the absence of corroboration.

                      5. It is further submitted that subsequent to the

         registration of the FIR, departmental proceedings were initiated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                            3/7




         against the petitioner on identical allegations. A full-fledged

         departmental enquiry was conducted and the entire matter was

         assessed. Upon such enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted a

         detailed and reasoned report exonerating the petitioner of all

         charges. The said report has been brought on record by way of

         supplementary affidavit. Learned counsel submits that though

         departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings are distinct,

         in the peculiar facts of the present case, the departmental

         exoneration lends strong support to the petitioner’s contention

         that the allegations in the FIR are unfounded and continuation of

         the criminal prosecution would amount to abuse of the process

         of law.

                      6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has placed

         reliance upon the decision of this Court in Narendar Kumar

         Ram v. State of Bihar, rendered in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction

         Case No. 1430 of 2024, wherein it was held that a breath

         analyzer test by itself, in the absence of corroborative medical

         evidence such as blood or urine examination, cannot be treated

         as conclusive proof of consumption of alcohol. Reliance has

         also been placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

         in Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v. State of Maharashtra,

         reported in (1971) 3 SCC 930, wherein it was categorically held
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                            4/7




         that no conclusion regarding consumption of alcohol can be

         drawn merely from the smell of alcohol on a person’s breath,

         unsteady gait, incoherent speech or dilated pupils, and that the

         factum of consumption can be reliably established only through

         blood and urine tests. In the present case, it is pointed out that

         there is not even an allegation that the petitioner exhibited any

         physical or behavioral symptoms of intoxication at the time of

         his apprehension.

                      7. Per contra, learned APP appearing for the State has

         opposed the petition and submitted that the FIR was registered

         on the basis of credible information and that the breath analyzer

         test was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the

         Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, using an authorized and

         calibrated device. It is contended that the breath analyzer

         reading of 65 mg per 100 ml, prima-facie, discloses commission

         of an offence and justifies registration of the FIR. It is further

         argued that departmental exoneration does not operate as a bar

         to criminal prosecution, as the two proceedings operate in

         distinct fields.

                      8. This Court has given anxious consideration to the

         rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties,

         the materials available on record, and the settled principles of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                            5/7




         law governing the issue. Upon consideration, it becomes evident

         that the foundation of the prosecution case rests almost entirely

         on the breath analyzer test allegedly conducted by the police

         party. There is a complete absence of corroborative medical

         evidence in the form of blood or urine examination, which alone

         are recognized as reliable and conclusive methods for

         establishing consumption of alcohol. This Court also finds that

         there is no allegation whatsoever that the petitioner was found to

         be walking unsteadily, speaking incoherently, or exhibiting any

         other physical signs commonly associated with intoxication.

                      9. The absence of such corroborative circumstances

         assumes significance in light of the law laid down by the

         Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v.

         State of Maharashtra, reported in (1971) 3 SCC 930, wherein it

         has been unequivocally held that breath analyzer results or smell

         of alcohol, in isolation, cannot form the sole basis for

         concluding that a person has consumed alcohol. The ratio laid

         down therein squarely applies to the facts of the present case.

                      10. The Court also takes note of the departmental

         proceedings initiated against the petitioner on the same set of

         allegations, which culminated in his exoneration after a detailed

         enquiry. While it is trite law that departmental proceedings and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                            6/7




         criminal proceedings are independent and that exoneration in

         one does not automatically nullify the other, in the present case

         the departmental findings do reinforce the conclusion that the

         allegations against the petitioner lack credibility and are unlikely

         to withstand judicial scrutiny in a criminal trial.

                      11. Further guidance is drawn from the principles

         enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana

         v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp 1 SCC 335, wherein the

         contours of the High Court’s power to quash criminal

         proceedings were delineated. One of the well-recognized

         categories warranting such interference is where the allegations,

         even if taken at their face value, do not disclose the commission

         of any offence, or where the proceedings are manifestly attended

         with mala fides or amount to an abuse of the process of law.

                      12. Applying the aforesaid principles to the present

         case, this Court is of the considered view that the FIR, being

         founded on incomplete, uncorroborated and unreliable evidence,

         does not disclose a prima-facie case warranting continuation of

         the criminal proceedings.

                      13. Ordinarily, the Court would be slow to interfere

         with an FIR at the threshold; however, where the materials on

         record demonstrably fail to satisfy the basic legal requirements
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2684 of 2024 dt.06-01-2026
                                                         7/7




                      for prosecution and continuation of proceedings would result in

                      undue harassment of the accused without serving any legitimate

                      public interest, the Court would be justified in exercising its

                      inherent jurisdiction. In the facts and circumstances of the

                      present case, the absence of confirmatory medical evidence, lack

                      of any observable indicia of intoxication, and the petitioner’s

                      exoneration in departmental proceedings cumulatively persuade

                      this Court to hold that continuation of the criminal proceedings

                      would amount to abuse of the process of law.

                                   14. Accordingly, the present application is allowed

                      and the First Information Report registered as Gardanibagh P.S.

                      Case No. 635 of 2023 dated 09.09.2023, is hereby quashed.




                                             (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          19.01.2026
Transmission Date       19.01.2026