SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusThe State of Bihar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75126 of 2023
    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2022 Thana- POTHIYA District- Kishanganj
======================================================
SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH son of Late Gagan Dev Prasad Singh @ Late
Gagan Dev Singh R/o- Nital Basti (Nitali Basti), W.No-6, PS- Thakurganj
Dist- Kishanganj

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

                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Prabhakar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL JUDGMENT
 Date : 07-04-2026


              Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

 for the State.

                  2. The present application has been filed by the

 petitioner invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court for

 quashing the order dated 04.05.2023 passed by the learned

 Additional Sessions Judge II -cum- Special Judge (Excise) I,

 Kishanganj in Special Case No. 1021 of 2022 arising out of Pothia

 PS Case No 232 of 2022 whereby and where under the learned Court

 took cognizance against the petitioner under Section 30 (a) of the

 Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act.

                  3. The prosecution case is that the informant alleges

 that during patrolling on 25.09.2022, he received secret information
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75126 of 2023 dt.07-04-2026
                                            2/6




         about the foreign liquor kept in the motorcycle bearing No BR-

         37AA-4705 near Railway RUB Pool No 73 situated between Pothia

         Chowk, Chichuabari. On the basis of the information, he reached

         along with constable near railway track. He asked from the labourers

         who were working on railway line upon which Santosh Kumar Singh

         (petitioner) replied that he is the owner of the motorcycle after which

         the informant searched the motorcycle and found a plastic bag kept

         on its guard in which 15 bottles (5.625 liters) foreign liquor was

         recovered.

                         4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

         petitioner is a resident of Kishanganj district and he is an employee

         of North East Railway posted as Track Maintainer I in Katihar

         Division.     At the time of transporting some articles which was

         property of railway from one place to another place during working

         period, the informant came and made illegal demand upon which

         petitioner replied about interference made during work of railway

         after which the informant threatened him to face the consequences. It

         is further submitted that the petitioner also reported to the higher

         authorities against the act of the informant but when the petitioner

         was engaged in his official duties, the informant came and has falsely

         implicated him in the present case.

                         5. It is also submitted that the Investigating Officer

         supported the act of the informant and has not investigated the case

         fairly and after completion of formalities submitted charge sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75126 of 2023 dt.07-04-2026
                                            3/6




         under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

         (Amendment) Act, 2018 against the petitioner. It is next submitted

         that perusal of the FIR would show that total 5.625 liters foreign

         liquor was recovered from the motorcycle which the petitioner

         claimed to be his own. The petitioner states that the motorcycle was

         lying in an open space and the mischief of any other person cannot be

         ruled out.

                         6. The Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,

         2018, and its implementing scheme cast a statutory duty on the

         excise/police authorities to keep the seized liquor in safe custody till

         the order of the Collector, and where chemical examination is

         required, to ensure that the seized article is handled in a matter that

         preserves its identity and purity. Provision is made for safe custody

         of seized intoxicants, for getting chemical examination, and for

         destruction of unlawful intoxicants only after retaining a sample and

         following prescribed procedures. However, the act does not contain

         a detailed rule-based regime for chain of custody analogous to

         Section 52-A of the NDPS Act.

                         7. In such a situation, the well settled principles of

         evidence-law and the jurisprudence on chain of custody in excisable-

         substance and narcotics cases are fully applicable.       Courts have

         consistently held that where a conviction is sought to be founded on a

         contraband and chemical report, the prosecution must establish an

         unbroken, documented chain of custody from the moment of seizure,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75126 of 2023 dt.07-04-2026
                                            4/6




         through storage, sampling, forwarding to the Chemical Examiner,

         return of the report, and production of the same article before the

         Court. The chain must show who had the article or sample at each

         stage, the date-time of transfer, and the condition of the seal; gaps,

         inconsistencies, or non-contemporaneous documentation render the

         evidence unreliable.

                         8. The absence of an explicit provision in the Bihar

         excise statute does not, therefore, absolve the prosecution from the

         duty of maintaining an evidentiary-quality chain of custody. The

         duty to preserve the integrity of the seized article flows from the

         conjunction of the statutory requirement of sale custody and the

         requirement of reliable proof under the Evidence Act.

                         9. The record discloses that the prosecution has failed

         to demonstrate a continuous and tamper-proof chain of custody of the

         seized liquor and the sample drawn therefrom. The seizure-memo,

         forwarding-note, read together, reveal gaps and inconsistencies in the

         handling of the seized article. The prosecution has not been able to

         account for who had custody of the liquor at each stage, how it is

         stored, in what manner the sample was drawn and forwarded to the

         Chemical Examiner, and whether the exhibit produced before the

         Court is the same which was seized at the initial stage. The record

         also fails to show an unbroken continuity of seal-integrity at critical

         junctures.

                         10. The prosecution has further failed to produce any
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75126 of 2023 dt.07-04-2026
                                            5/6




         seizure witness-memo or independent record of the sampling-

         procedure, and the subsequent order of the Collector for destruction

         of the seized liquor has obliterated the possibility of effective cross-

         examination on the identity of the article. In these circumstances, the

         reliance placed on the narrative of seizure alone cannot be treated as

         a reliable evidentiary foundation for a conviction under Section 30

         (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

                         11. Once the chain of custody stands ruptured, the

         entire evidentiary edifice built upon the seized liquor and its analysis

         crumbles, and the Court cannot act upon the same as a reliable basis

         for conviction.

                         12. In view of the aforesaid, this Court holds that the

         prosecution has failed to establish a tamper-proof and continuous

         chain of custody of the seized foreign liquor and the sample sent for

         chemical examination. The continued prosecution in Case No 232 of

         2022 on the file of Pothia Police Station, Kishanganj under Section

         30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018,

         on such an evidentiary foundation would amount to perpetuation of

         an inherently defective process and would be contrary to the

         principles of fair trial and the ends of justice.

                         13. Thus, the order dated 04.05.2023 passed by the

         learned Additional Sessions Judge II -cum- Special Judge (Excise) I,

         Kishanganj in Special Case No. 1021 of 2022 arising out of Pothia

         PS Case No 232 of 2022 is hereby quashed.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75126 of 2023 dt.07-04-2026
                                                         6/6




                                        14 . Accordingly, the application stands allowed.


                                                        (Ansul, J)
M.E.H./-
AFR/NAFR                       NAFR
CAV DATE                        NA
Uploading Date             21.04.2026
Transmission Date          21.04.2026