Patna High Court
Sumit Yadav @ Sumit Kumar @ DCMversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
Confiscation of premises is unlawful where the owner is not shown to have participated in the offence, as required by Sections 56, 57B and 58 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
Summary
The petitioners, Sumit Yadav and his mother Suman Devi, challenged the seizure and confiscation of their house‑cum‑premises by the Collector of Purnea after a police raid recovered 44.25 litres of illicit liquor. The State argued that the premises were used for illegal liquor storage and therefore fell within the confiscation powers under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The Court examined the statutory provisions, particularly Sections 30, 56, 57B and 58 of the Act, and the procedural rules governing release of premises on payment of penalty. It found that no allegation or evidence linked the owner, petitioner 2, to the offence, and that the owner’s participation is a prerequisite for confiscation under the Act. Consequently, the seizure was held arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution, and the orders of the Collector, Excise Commissioner and Excise Secretary were set aside, with the premises to be released upon payment of a Rs 20,000 penalty.
Issues considered
- Whether the seizure and confiscation of the premises under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 is valid when the owner is not alleged to have participated in the illicit liquor offence.
- Whether the statutory provisions and rules require proof of the owner’s involvement before confiscation can be ordered.
- Whether the confiscation violates constitutional guarantees of equality (Article 14) and property rights (Article 300A).
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30, 56, 57B, 58
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34
Subjects
- illicit liquor
- confiscation
- seizure of premises
- property rights
- Article 14
- Article 300A
- penalty
- release of premises
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12523 of 2025
======================================================
1. Sumit Yadav @ Sumit Kumar @ DCM, Gender-Male, Son of Late Arun
Yadav, Resident of Village- Budhiya Dhankatta, P.S- Sarsi, Dist.- Purnia.
2. Suman Devi, Gender-Female, Wife of Late Arun Yadav, Resident of Village-
Budhiya Dhankatta, P.S- Sarsi, Dist.- Purnia.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Excise Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Collector, District- Purnia, Bihar.
4. The Excise Officer, Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, Purnia.
5. The Superintendent of Police, District- Purnia.
6. The Officer In-charge, P.S.- Sarsi, District- Purnia.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Standing Counsel 21
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date: 20-04-2026
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the
order dated 13.01.2023, passed by the learned Collector, Purnea in
Excise Case No. 519 of 2022, the order dated 14.08.2023 passed
by the Excise Commissioner, Purena in Excise Appeal No. 110 of
2023 and the Revisional Order dated 16.10.2023, passed by the
Excise Secretary, Bihar, Patna in Excise Revision Case No.41 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
2/13
2023. The petitioners have further prayed for release of the house-
cum-premises (vacant land) of the petitioner No.2 on payment of
reasonable penalty.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the police personnel of
Sarsi Police Station and the Sub-Inspector of Police received
information that some persons were engaging in selling of illicit
liquor to the customers at village Budhiya Dhankatta and the
petitioner No.1 is also engaged in such illicit trade. Thereafter, a
raid was conducted by the police personnel at the house of the
petitioners and 18.750 liters of illicit liquor was recovered from
the fodder house, while 25.500 liters of illicit liquor was recovered
from the maize field, situated adjacent to the fodder house. The
said seizure of illicit liquor led to filing of Sarsi P.S. Case No.62 of
2022 dt. 18.03.2022 under Sections 272/273/34 of the Indian Penal
Code & Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
(as amended up to date) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2016’).
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that
as far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned, she is the owner of the
fodder house/adjacent land from where illicit liquor has been
recovered, however neither any allegation has been imputed to her
in the F.I.R. nor any accusation has been made against her in the
counter affidavit. It is submitted that the petitioner No.2 is neither
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
3/13
having any connection nor any relation with the illicit liquor
recovered from the fodder house/adjacent land, situated at Mauza-
Budhiya Dhankatta, P.S. No. 60, appertaining to Khata No. 865,
Khesra No. 2261, ad-measuring 15 decimals, hence it is submitted
that the land in question be released in favor of the petitioner No.2
who is the owner of the house/land in question and as far as the
petitioner No.1 is concerned, he is son of the petitioner No.2, who
is the culprit.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-State
has submitted that a raid was conducted upon receipt of
confidential information at the premises in question, whereupon
44.250 liters of illicit liquor was recovered from the fodder house
and the adjacent maize field and in fact the police had confidential
information to the effect that the petitioner No.1 and one another
co-accused Shankar (son of the Chaukidar of the village) were
selling illicit liquor to customers on the occasion of Holi. It is also
submitted that from the premises in question 44.250 liters of illicit
liquor has been recovered, hence confiscation proceedings have
rightly been initiated, leading to passing of the impugned order
dated 13.01.2023, by the learned Collector, Purnea whereby and
whereunder, the premises in question has been confiscated.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
4/13
5. The petitioner No.1 had then filed an appeal bearing
Excise Appeal Case No. 110 of 2023, however the same has been
dismissed by an order dated 14.08.2023, passed by the Excise
Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. Thereafter, the petitioner No.1 had
filed a revision petition bearing Excise Revision Case No.41 of
2023, however the same has also stood dismissed by an order
dated 16.10.2023, passed by the Secretary, Prohibition and Excise,
Department of Prohibition, Excise and Registration, Bihar, Patna,
hence it is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents that
since 44.250 liters of illicit liquor has been recovered from the
premises in question, the same has rightly been confiscated.
6. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and
perused the materials on record from which it is apparent that the
present case arises out of Sarsi P.S. Case No.62 of 2022 dated
18.03.2022 which has been registered under Sections 272/273/34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Act, 2016
against the petitioner No.1 on account of recovery of 44.250 liters
of illicit liquor from the premises in question. At this juncture, we
would like to advert to the provisions contained in the amended
Act, 2016, Sections 30, 56, 57B and 58 being relevant are being
reproduced herein below:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
5/13
“30. Penalty for unlawful manufacture, import, export,
transport, possession, sale, purchase, distribution, etc. of any
intoxicant or liquor. -
Whoever, in contravention of any provision of this Act or of any
rule, regulation, order made, notification issued thereunder, or
without a valid license, permit or pass issued under this Act, or in
breach of any condition of any license, permit or pass renewed or
authorization granted thereunder –
(a) Manufactures, possesses, buys, sells, distributes, collects,
stores, bottles, imports, exports, transports, removes or cultivates
any intoxicant, liquor, hemp; or
(b) Constructs or establishes or works in any manufactory,
distillery, brewery or warehouse; or
(c) Manufactures, uses, keeps or has in his possession any
material, utensil, implement or apparatus, or uses any premises,
whatsoever, for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant or
liquor; or
(d) Manufactures any material or film either with or without the
State Government logo or logo of any State or wrapper or any
other thing in which liquor or intoxicant can be packed or any
apparatus or implement or machine, for the purpose of packing
any liquor or intoxicant; or
(e) Removes any liquor or intoxicant from any distillery, brewery,
warehouse, other place of storage licensed, established,
authorized or continued under this Act; or
(f) Manufactures, possesses, sells, distributes, bottles, imports,
exports, transports or removes, any preparation made with or
without the use of any intoxicant or liquor, which can serve as an
alcohol or a substitute for alcohol and is used or likely to be used
or consumed for the purposes of getting intoxicated; shall be
punishable with imprisonment for the term which may extend to
life and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
6/13
Provided that the punishment:
(a) For the first offence shall not be less than five years
imprisonment and fine of not less than one lakh rupees, and
(b) For the second and subsequent offences shall not be less than
ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of not less than five lakh
rupees”.
56. Confiscation of Seized Items.- (1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in Section 57B, whenever an offence punishable under
this Act, is committed, the Collector or an Officer authorized by
him may confiscate such items based on the report of the
investigating officer.
(2) Such items may include-
(i) any premises or part thereof;
(ii) any animal, vehicle, vessel or conveyance;
(iii) any liquor or intoxicant;
(iv) any other item having bearing with the case;
Provided, where things as mentioned in Section 57 are to be
destroyed, then the Collector or an officer authorized by him need
not confiscate the same before their destruction.
(3) The State Government may issue necessary direction,
guidelines, regulations and instructions with respect to the mode
and manner of search, seizure, destruction and confiscation.
57B. Things or premises liable to be released upon penalty.- (1)
Any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for
committing any offence punishable under this Act that has been
seized by any police Officer or Excise Officer may be released by
the Collector upon payment of such penalty as may be notified by
the State Government.
2. Any premises or part thereof used for committing any offence
punishable under this Act that has been seized by any police
Officer or Excise Officer may be released by the Collector upon
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
7/13
payment of such penalty as may be notified by the State
Government.
(3) If the person concerned does not pay the penalty, then the
Collector shall proceed to confiscate the said animal, vehicle,
vessel or other conveyance and premises as per Section-58.
58. Confiscation by District Collector. - (1) Notwithstanding
anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being
in force, where anything liable for confiscation under this Act is
seized or detained under the provisions of this Act, the officer
seizing and detaining such property shall, without any reasonable
delay submit a report to the District Collector who has jurisdiction
over the said area;
(2) On receipt of the report under subsection (1), the District
Collector if satisfied that an offence under this Act has been
committed, may, whether or not prosecution is instituted for the
commission of such an offence and whether or not a case is
pending before any court, order confiscation of such property;
(3) The Collector shall, before passing an order under subsection
(2), give a reasonable opportunity to the person concerned, of
being heard;
(4) While making an order of confiscation under sub-section (2),
the District Collector may also order that such of the properties
which the order of confiscation relates, which in his opinion
cannot be preserved or are not fit for human consumption, be
destroyed. Whenever any confiscated article has to be destroyed in
conformity with these provisions, it shall be destroyed in the
presence of an Executive Magistrate or officer ordering the
confiscation or forfeiture, as the case may be, or in the presence of
the Excise Officer not below the rank of a Sub Inspector;
(5) While making an order of confiscation under sub-section (2), if
the District Collector is of the opinion that it is expedient in the
public interest to do so, he may order the said property or any part
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
8/13
thereof to be sold by public auction or dispose of departmentally
and proceeds deposited with the State Government;
(6) The District Collector shall submit a full report of all
particulars of confiscation to the Commissioner of Excise within
one month of such confiscation”.
7. We would also like to refer to Rule 12 B and 13 B of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022.
"12B. Release of Premises on Payment of Penalty- (1) If any
premises or part thereof has been seized or sealed by any police or
excise officer under the Act, then in terms of section-57B (2) of the
Act, the Collector or an officer authorized by him, upon receipt of
an application in Form V from the owner of the said premises, may
release or unseal the said premises or part thereof upon payment
of such penalty as may be ordered by the Collector or the officer
authorized by him.
Provided, where it is not possible to ascertain the owner of the
premises or the owner is not coming forward, the Collector or the
officer authorized by him shall, after waiting for 15 days from the
date of seizure/sealing, proceed to confiscate the premises as per
the provisions of the Act.
(2) The Collector or the officer authorized by him shall have due
regard to the economic status of the individual, nature of his
involvement in the crime, location of the premises and the
quantum of intoxicant recovered while deciding the quantum of
fine to be paid by the individual. However, the fine shall not be
less than Rs. one Lakh in any case.
In any case, the Collector shall not wait beyond 15 days from the
date of seizure/sealing and if during this period, the
accused/owner does not pay up the penalty he shall proceed with
the confiscation/auction.
(3) Notwithstanding above, if on a report by police officer or
excise officer, the Collector or the officer authorized by him is
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
9/13
satisfied that releasing the premises shall not be in the public
interest, the Collector or the officer authorized by him shall
proceed ahead with the confiscation of the said premises or part
thereof and its subsequent auction/disposal.
(4) Such penalty shall be, regardless of the outcome of the trial if
any, before the Special Court, non-refundable.
(5) The owner of the Premises shall, after the release of the
premises, allow the inspection of the premises as and when desired
by the authorities.
13B. Procedure of confiscation of Premises.- (1) Where it is
decided by the Collector that the premises is not to be released on
penalty or where the owner does not pay the required penalty, the
confiscation proceeding shall be initiated. The proposal for
confiscation of the premises shall be sent by the police/excise
officer to the Collector (or an officer authorized by him) within 30
days from the date of seizure/sealing. The officer concerned shall
immediately start the confiscation proceeding.
In case of delay of beyond 30 days, in submission of the proposal
for confiscation, the police/excise officer will have to explain the
delay.
(2) The officer concerned, on receipt of proposal of confiscation of
any premises or part thereof any property liable for confiscation
from police/excise officer, shall issue show cause notice to the
owner(s) of the premises or property. Simultaneously, he shall
issue notice to the Chemical Examiner and/or such revenue
officers for their reports.
(3) Such notice issued by the officer shall be served as per
procedure prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for
service of summons.
(4) The officer shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to
the owner(s) of the premises or property. The investigating/inquiry
officer shall also be given opportunity to participate in such
hearing.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
10/13
(5) If the person to whom notice has validly been served fails to
appear in the proceeding on two consecutive dates fixed for
hearing, the confiscating authority shall proceed to pass the order
ex-parte.
(6) The officer shall, after hearing the parties, pass appropriate
order of confiscation or unsealing, as the case may be, with
respect to sealed/seized premises or property on the basis of his
satisfaction whether an offence has been committed or not in terms
of the Act.
(7) The officer shall ensure that the order for confiscation is
passed within 90 days from the date of seizure/sealing of the
premises.
(8) Any person aggrieved by the order passed by the Collector
under the provisions of the Act may file appeal in the manner
prescribed under these rules."
8. A bare perusal of the aforesaid statutory provisions would
show that a premises or part thereof used for committing an
offence under the Act, 2016 can be seized/confiscated but the same
can be released upon payment of penalty, however while deciding
the quantum of fine to be paid by the individual, due regard has to
be given to the economic status of the individual, nature of his
involvement in the crime, location of the premises and the
quantum of intoxicant recovered. Moreover, before passing an
order of confiscation or unsealing, as the case may be, with respect
to sealed/seized premises or property, the concerned officer has to
be satisfied as to whether an offence has been committed or not in
terms of the Act, 2016. Thus, it is apparent from the statutory
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
11/13
provisions contained in the Act, 2016 and the Rules framed
thereunder that direct involvement or connivance of the owner of
the premises in question in illegal use of such premises for
stacking illicit liquor is an essential prerequisite for seizure and
confiscation of the premises in question or imposing any penalty
for release of the same.
9. Now coming to the present case, we find that neither the
petitioner No. 2 has been made an accused in the aforesaid
criminal case nor any allegation have been levelled against her to
the effect that she was having any complicity in the trade of illicit
liquor being carried out by her son. We also find that no material
has been produced in the counter affidavit to show that either the
petitioner No.2 was involved or having any connivance in the
alleged occurrence. Moreover, there is no proof on record to show
that the petitioner No.2 was having any connection with the trade
of illicit liquor or she was instrumental in the alleged occurrence
or she was having any direct/indirect involvement or connivance
in illegal use of the aforesaid premises for stacking the illicit
liquor. Therefore, we find that the action of the State authorities in
sealing the premises in question and confiscation the same is
arbitrary and hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is
also violative of the constitutional right of the petitioner to hold
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
12/13
property as provided for under Article 300 A of the Constitution of
India which prohibits any deprivation of the property save by
authority of law. Thus, we are of the considered view that the Act,
2016 in no way authorizes the officials to seize the premises in
question in the facts and circumstances of the present case, hence
the seizure and confiscation of the premises in question is without
any authority of law. Accordingly, we set aside the order dated
13.01.2023, passed by the learned Collector, Purnea in Excise
Case No. 519 of 2022, the order dated 14.08.2023 passed by the
Excise Commissioner, Purina in Excise Appeal No. 110 of 2023
and the Revisional Order dated 16.10.2023, passed by the Excise
Secretary, Bihar, Patna in Excise Revision Case No.41 of 2023.
10. We further find that the petitioner No.1 is the son of the
petitioner No.2 who is alleged to be carrying out illicit trade of
liquor and for the said purpose he was using the premises of the
petitioner No.2 for stacking illicit liquor, hence we are of the view
that it would be in the interest of justice that the petitioners are
directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Thousand) with the Collector, Purnea within a period of four
weeks from today, whereupon the Collector, Purnea shall ensure
that the premises/land in question is de-sealed and released in
favor of the petitioner No.2 within a period of two weeks,
Patna High Court CWJC No.12523 of 2025 dt.20-04-2026
13/13
thereafter upon him being satisfied about the ownership of the
petitioner No.2 with regard to the premises in question.
11. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands allowed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 29.04.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…