Patna High Court
Sri Binod SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
Confiscation of a premises under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 is invalid unless the owner’s participation or connivance in the offence is established, and the order passed after the statutory 90‑day period is ultra vires.
Summary
The petitioner, Binod Singh, challenged the confiscation of a room in his property after illicit liquor was seized from that premises during a raid, where the tenant Sudhir Kumar was arrested. The lower authorities had sealed the room on 31 July 2024 and later ordered its confiscation on 14 December 2024, exceeding the 90‑day period prescribed for such orders under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022. The petitioner argued that he was neither an accused nor involved in the illegal activity and that the seizure violated Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution. The Court examined the statutory provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 and the Rules, noting that confiscation requires proof of the owner’s participation or connivance in the offence, which was absent. Finding the confiscation arbitrary and unconstitutional, the Court set aside the lower orders and directed the de‑sealing and release of the room. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Collector can confiscate a premises without establishing the owner’s involvement or connivance in the illicit liquor offence.
- Whether the order of confiscation passed after the statutory 90‑day period is valid under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2022.
- Whether the confiscation violates the petitioner’s constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 300A.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30, 30(a), 56, 56(b), 57B, 58, 62
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Subjects
- confiscation
- illicit liquor
- property rights
- Article 14
- Article 300A
- excise law
- tenant
- seizure
- writ petition
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13594 of 2025
======================================================
Sri Binod Singh Son of Late Abadh Vihari Singh, Resident of Mohalla-
Anandpuri House No.- 62, West Boring Canal Road Ward No. 22, P.S.- Sri
Krishnapuri, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Prohibition Excise and
Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition Excise and Registration
Department, Government of Bihar Patna.
3. The Secretary (Excise and Prohibition), Bihar, Patna.
4. The Excise Commissioner, Prohibition Excise and Registration Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Patna.
6. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patna Sadar, Patna.
7. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.
8. The Nodal Officer, Excise Kosank (Cell), Patna.
9. The S.H.O., Excise P.S., Patna Sadar, Patna.
10. The Investigating Officer, Excise, P.S., Patna Sadar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mujiabaul Haque, GP-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date: 30-03-2026
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the
order dated 14.12.2024, passed by the learned Court of
Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna in Confiscation Case
No. 2381/2024-25 whereby and whereunder the room in
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
2/15
question belonging to the petitioner has been confiscated. The
petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dated 7.5.2025
passed by the learned Commissioner, Excise, Bihar Patna in
Excise Appeal Case No. 52 of 2025 whereby and whereunder
the appeal has been dismissed. Lastly, the petitioner has
challenged the revisional order dated 26.06.2025 passed by the
learned Secretary (Prohibition and Excise) Bihar, Patna in
Excise Revision Case No. 17 of 2025 whereby and whereunder
the revision petition has been dismissed and the appellate order
dated 07.05.2025 has been upheld.
02. The case in brief according to the informant of the
connected FIR, namely Inspector of Police, Patna who has filed
a complaint dated 31.07.2024 before the Officer-in-Charge,
Prohibition Police Station, Patna is that on 31.07.2024 at about
08:30 PM while he was getting ready to go to his house, he
suddenly received an information to the effect that illicit liquor
has been stored in one room of the House situated at Manorama
Apartment, Boring Canal Road, Patna, whereafter a raid was
conducted and 61.875 litre of illicit liquor was recovered as also
one Sudhir Kumar was arrested from the spot who is stated to be
the tenant in one room of the house of the petitioner, whereupon
Patna Sadar (Excise) P.S. Case No. 1815 of 2024 dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
3/15
31.07.2024 was registered under Section 30(a), Section 56(b)
and Section 62 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
and Amendment Act, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act,
2016”). It appears that the learned Collector-cum-District
Magistrate, Patna had initiated confiscation proceeding vide
Excise Confiscation Case No. 2381 of 2024-25 wherein he has
come to a conclusion that 61.875 litre of illicit liquor has been
recovered from the room in question, hence there is no other
alternative but to confiscate the room in question and
accordingly has passed an order dated 14.12.2024 confiscating
the room in question. On account of there being some
typographical mistake in the aforesaid order dated 14.12.2024,
learned Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna vide order
dated 10.02.2025 has corrected the Khata No., Khesra No.,
name of the Mauza and other details pertaining to the room in
question. The petitioner had then challenged the aforesaid order
dated 14.12.2024 by filing an appeal bearing Excise Appeal
Case No. 52 of 2025 before the learned Commissioner, Excise,
Bihar, Patna however the same has been dismissed vide order
dated 07.05.2025. The said order dated 07.05.2025 was then
challenged by the petitioner by filing a revision petition bearing
Excise Revision Case No. 17 of 2025 however, the same has
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
4/15
also stood dismissed by an order dated 26.06.2025, passed by
the Secretary (Prohibition and Excise) Bihar, Patna.
03. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that admittedly neither the petitioner was found at the place of
occurrence nor the excise FIR in question has been lodged
against the petitioner nor there is any whisper in the counter
affidavit filed by the respondents in the present case that the
petitioner was engaged in stacking of illicit liquor or was in any
manner connected with the alleged occurrence in question. It is
also submitted that the said accused person namely, Sudhir
Kumar is the tenant of the petitioner and he along with one
Rahul Kumar had taken the room in question on rent, whereafter
the said Rahul Kumar had paid half the amount of rent, however
regarding the other half, he had stated that he would bring the
same after getting it from his father and deposit the same but
during the interregnum period, the aforesaid excise FIR was
lodged and the said Sudhir Kumar, who has been made an
accused in the said case was arrested.
04. The learned counsel for the petitioner has, at this
juncture advanced another argument to the effect that as per
Rule 13B (vii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Rules, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules,
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
5/15
2022”), the concerned officer is required to ensure that the order
of confiscation of premises in question is passed within 90 days
from the date of seizure/sealing of the premises. In the present
case, though the premises was sealed on 31.07.2024 and period
of 90 days expired on 01.11.2024 however, the order of
confiscation has been passed by the Ld. Collector on 14.12.2024
i.e., after expiry of 90 days. In this connection, reference has
been made to a judgment dated 23.12.2025, rendered by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sunita Sinha Vs.
State of Bihar and Ors. (CWJC No. 19581 of 2021), relevant
portion whereof is being reproduced herein below:-
“We only hope and expect that the Authorities under the
Act shall take appropriate action at the earliest and in
accordance with law, within the time schedule fixed,
failing which the vehicle/property/things liable for
confiscation shall be deemed to have been released
without any further reference to this Court.”
Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the
aforesaid judgment rendered in the case of Sunita Sinha
(supra) submits that the room/premises in question be released.
05. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents
has submitted by referring to the counter affidavit filed in the
present case that on account of recovery of 61.875 litre of illicit
liquor, the room in question has been confiscated. It is further
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
6/15
submitted that even for the sake of argument, if it is admitted
that the premises in question was duly let out on rent, it still
remains the duty of the petitioner to ensure that no illegal
activity is carried out in the said premises including that of
stacking of illicit liquor. It is also submitted that the petitioner
has failed to support his claim of having rented out the room in
question to the aforesaid tenants, hence the present writ petition
is bereft of any merit and is liable to be dismissed.
06.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the materials on record from which it is apparent that
the present case arises out of Patna Sadar (Excise) PS Case No.
1815 of 2024 dated 31.07.2024, registered under Section 30(a),
Section 56(b) & Section 62 of the Act, 2016/ Amendment Act,
2022 against Sudhir Kumar on account of recovery of 61.875
litre of illicit liquor from him as also from the room in question
and the said Sudhir Kumar was arrested from the spot. At this
juncture, we would like to advert to the provisions contained in
the Act, 2016, as amended upto date, Sections 30, 56, 57B and
58 whereof being relevant are being reproduced herein below:-
“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
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
7/15
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.
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
8/15
(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 benotified 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 payment of such penalty as may be
notified by the State Government.
(3) If the person concerned does not pay the penalty, then
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
9/15
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
subsection (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, asthe 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
subsection (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 thereof to be sold by
public auction or dispose of departmentally and proceeds
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
10/15
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”.
07. We would also like to refer to Rule 12B and 13B 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
11/15
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 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, nonrefundable.
(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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
12/15
(2) The officer concerned, on receipt of proposal
ofconfiscation 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.
(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
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
13/15
in the manner prescribed under these rules."
08. 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 sealed/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 the 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 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.
09. Now coming back to the present case, we find that
neither the petitioner has been made an accused in the aforesaid
criminal case nor any recovery of illicit liquor has been made
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
14/15
from his possession nor the respondents have produced any
material in the counter affidavit to show either the involvement
or connivance of the petitioners in the alleged occurrence.
Moreover, there is no proof on record to show that either the
petitioner was having any connection with the accused namely
Sudhir Kumar or he was instrumental in the alleged occurrence
or he was having direct/indirect involvement or connivance in
illegal use of the aforesaid premises for stacking illicit liquor.
We find that the action of the State authorities in sealing the
premises in question and initiating confiscation proceedings 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
property as provided for under Article 300 A of the Constitution
of India which prohibits any deprivation of the property save by
the 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 & circumstances of the present
case, hence the seizure & the proceedings initiated for confiscation
of the premises in question is without any authority of law.
10. Accordingly, we set aside the order dated 14.12.2024
passed by the Ld. Court of Collector-cum-District Magistrate,
Patna whereby and whereunder the room in question belonging
Patna High Court CWJC No.13594 of 2025 dt.30-03-2026
15/15
to the petitioner has been confiscated, the order dated 07.5.2025
passed by the learned Commissioner, Excise, Bihar, Patna
whereby and whereunder the appeal has been dismissed as also
the order dated 26.06.2025 passed by the learned Secretary
(Excise and Prohibition) Bihar, Patna whereby and whereunder
the revision petition has been dismissed and direct for de-
sealing and release of the room in question in favor of the
petitioner upon the State authorities being satisfied about the
ownership of the petitioner with regard to the room/premises in
question, within a period of two weeks of receipt/production of
a copy of this order.
11. The writ petition stands allowed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 10.04.2026
Transmission Date N/A
Checking your session…