Patna High Court
DEEPAK SINGH @DEEPAK KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The FIR is quashed as no offence is made out against the petitioner, and continuation of the prosecution would be an abuse of process.
Summary
The petitioner, a constable in the Bihar Police, filed an application to quash an FIR registered under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 37(D) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging consumption of liquor based on a Facebook photograph showing him holding a glass of beer. The photograph was taken in 2015, before the 2016 Excise Act came into force, and the petitioner argued that the image alone could not constitute a criminal offence. The Court examined the FIR and held that the photograph, being prior to the enactment of the law, could only be secondary evidence and could not alone justify prosecution. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court found that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process. Consequently, the FIR was quashed and the petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR under Section 420 IPC and Section 37(D) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act can be sustained solely on a photograph taken before the enactment of the Act.
- Whether the continuation of prosecution in such circumstances amounts to an abuse of the process of law.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 37(D)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 420
Subjects
- quash FIR
- retrospective law
- prohibition and excise
- Section 420 IPC
- abuse of process
- social media evidence
- police constable
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62689 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-385 Year-2017 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan
======================================================
Deepak Singh @ Deepak Kumar Son of Late Birendra Kumar Singh Resident
of Village - Najvanshi Bhawan Doubra Dhobi, P.O. and P.S.- Jasidih, Distt.-
Deoghar, Jharkhand, at present constable 113 P.O. and P.S.- Muffassil, Distt.-
Siwan, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Magan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Bhaskar Anand, Advocate
Mr. Vijay Kumar Vimal, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Meena Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 19-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present application has been filed praying for
quashing the F.I.R. bearing Muffasil P.S.Case No. 385 of 2017,
dated 09.08.2017, registered under Section 420 of the I.P.C. and
Section 37(D) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. The present F.I.R. dated 09.08.2017 was registered
on the basis of a written application of the official informant
based on an inquiry report, against the petitioner and others,
alleging therein that the petitioner along with other accused
persons were consuming liquor and the petitioner has posted
pictures of the same on his Facebook account on 09.09.2016.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62689 of 2019(4) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
petitioner is a constable in the Bihar Police and that the very
basis of allegation against the petitioner is that he is holding a
glass of beer and cheering up along with his friends in the
photographs posted on his Facebook account, when there was a
complete ban on the consumption of liquor in the State of Bihar,
however, the picture in question was taken in the year 2015, and
at that time, consumption of liquor was not prohibited in the
State of Bihar.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that even from a bare perusal of the FIR and the photographs
annexed therewith, it is evident that the photographs in question
has been clicked much prior to the enforcement of the Bihar
Excise Act, 2016 and therefore, the photographs could not be
the sole basis for initiating criminal prosecution against the
petitioner. Further, it is clear that no offence under Section 420
of the I.P.C. and Section 37(D) of the Bihar Prohibition of
Excise Act , 2016 are not made out.
6. Learned APP has opposed the present petition.
7. I have considered the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.
From the reading of the FIR, the only allegation against the
petitioner appears to be of clicking photographs with liquor.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62689 of 2019(4) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
However, aforesaid photographs cannot be the sole basis for
initiating the criminal prosecution against the petitioner. Section
37(D) of the Bihar Excise Act prohibits consumption and sale of
illicit liquor for which photographs may be treated as secondary
cooperating evidence, however, such photographs cannot be the
only basis to initiate criminal prosecution. The photographs in
question were clicked much prior to enforcement of the Bihar
Excise Act, 2016 which is an uncontroverted fact and is borne
out of the FIR itself. In my opinion no criminal offence is made
out against the petitioner.
8. Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs.
Bhajan Lal & Ors. reported as 1992 Supp(1) SCC 335, the
continuance of the criminal prosecution against the petitioner
would be an abuse of the process of law and therefore cannot be
permitted to be continued.
9. Accordingly, the F.I.R. bearing Muffasil P.S. Case
No. 385 of 2017 is quashed qua the petitioner.
10. In view of the above, this application is allowed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.