Patna High Court
Arpan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court granted liberty to file a revision petition under Section 93, stayed the auction of the vehicle, and disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating the merits.
Summary
The petitioner Arpan Kumar filed a writ petition seeking to quash a confiscation order dated 11‑02‑2025 issued by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Banka under Section 58 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, relating to a vehicle seized with 414.72 litres of illicit liquor. The petition also challenged an appellate order dated 30‑07‑2025 passed by the Commissioner of Excise and sought protection pending a revision petition under Section 93 of the same Act. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file the revision petition within two weeks and directed that the vehicle not be auctioned until the revision is decided. It further ordered that the revisional authority consider the petition on merits without limitation and issue a reasoned order within four weeks. The writ petition was consequently disposed of on these terms, without a substantive ruling on the merits of the confiscation or appellate orders.
Issues considered
- Whether the confiscation order under Section 58 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 can be quashed.
- Whether the appellate order can be challenged by filing a revision petition under Section 93 of the Act.
- Whether the seized vehicle may be auctioned pending the filing and disposal of the revision petition.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 58, 93
Subjects
- prohibition
- excise
- confiscation
- revision petition
- writ petition
- vehicle seizure
- auction stay
- Section 58
- Section 93
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20840 of 2025
======================================================
Arpan Kumar Son of Kapileshwar Chaudhay, Resident of Village
Shivnandanpur, Ward no 01, PO Muktapur, PS Kalyanpur, District
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Secretary, Excise and Prohibition, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Commissioner, Department of Excise and Prohibition, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Excise and Prohibition, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Banka.
6. The Excise Superintendent, Banka.
7. The Station House Officer, Dhankund Police Station, Banka.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akhilesh Dutta Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (28)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
3 16-02-2026 Thought the present writ petition has been filed for
quashing the order dated 11.02.2025, passed by the Deputy
Collector, Land Reforms, Banka in Confiscation (Prohibition)
Case No.75 of 2024-25, arising out of Dhankund P.S. Case
No.103 of 2024 dated 15.10.2024, registered under Section
30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 on account
Patna High Court CWJC No.20840 of 2025(3) dt.16-02-2026
2/3
of recovery of 414.72 liters of illicit liquor from the vehicle
bearing Registration No.BR33GB-5672, Chassis No.
MA1ZN2TNKN6G36378, Engine No.TNN4F90649 whereby
and whereunder the vehicle in question has been directed to be
confiscated under Section 58 of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act, 2016 as amended upto date (hereinafter referred to
as “the Act, 2016”) as also for quashing the appellate order
dated 30.07.2025, passed by the Commissioner, Excise, Bihar,
Patna in Excise Appeal Case No.106 of 2025, however at the
outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty on
behalf of the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid appellate order
dated 30.07.2025 by filing appropriate revision petition under
Section 93 of the Act, 2016, but he seeks some protection during
the interregnum period. Liberty so sought is granted.
2. It is needless to state that in case appropriate
revision petition is filed within a period of two weeks from
today, the revisional authority shall consider the same on merits
without being impeded by the issue of limitation and pass a
reasoned and a speaking order in accordance with law within a
period of four weeks, thereafter.
3. Since the learned counsel for the respondent has
submitted that the vehicle in question has not yet been
Patna High Court CWJC No.20840 of 2025(3) dt.16-02-2026
3/3
auctioned, we direct that in case appropriate revision petition is
filed by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today,
the vehicle in question shall not be auctioned till the disposal of
the revision petition.
4. The writ petition stands disposed off on the
aforesaid terms.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
kanchan/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.