Patna High Court
Raju Kumar Yadav @ Raju YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
The confiscation order is set aside as it was passed without a notice to show cause, violating natural justice.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Kumar Yadav, challenged the confiscation of his tractor (Reg. No. BR45GB-1553) which had been seized on suspicion of transporting 261 litres of illicit liquor. He had applied to the Collector‑cum‑District Magistrate for release of the vehicle under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, but the application was rejected and the Confiscating Authority proceeded to order confiscation without issuing a notice to show cause. The petitioner argued that the confiscation order violated the principles of natural justice as no opportunity to be heard was provided. The Court examined the procedural requirements under Rule 12A and held that a notice and hearing are mandatory before a confiscation order can be validly made. Consequently, the Court set aside the confiscation orders and remitted the matter to the Confiscating Authority to reconsider the release application afresh, directing a one‑month period for decision and a separate notice‑and‑hearing process for any confiscation proceeding.
Issues considered
- Whether the Confiscating Authority violated principles of natural justice by not issuing a notice to show cause before ordering confiscation of the vehicle.
- Whether the rejection of the release application under Rule 12A renders the Confiscating Authority functus officio for the confiscation proceeding.
- Whether the confiscation order is sustainable in law absent a hearing.
Subjects
- confiscation
- natural justice
- Rule 12A
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules
- vehicle seizure
- procedural due process
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.35 of 2026
======================================================
Raju Kumar Yadav @ Raju Yadav S/o Ram Singashan Yadav, Resident of
village - Bahmaur Khash, P.S.- Mohania, District - Kaimur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Secretary of the Excise Department, Bihar at
Patna.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Bihar Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Kaimur Bhabua.
4. The Superintendent of Police, Kaimur Bhabua.
5. The Superintendent of Excise, Kaimur Bhabua.
6. The Investigating Officer of Police Station Excise P.S., District- Kaimur.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Aquaib Khan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG-3
Mr. Saurav Kumar Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 12-05-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC
to AAG-3 for the State of Bihar.
2. The petitioner in this case is aggrieved by and
dissatisfied with the order dated 24.07.2025 passed by the
Secretary (Prohibition and Excise), Bihar, Patna in Excise
Revision Case No. 20/2025 by which the Revisional Authority has
been pleased to uphold the order passed by the Confiscating
Authority and the Appellate Authority. The Revisional Authority
Patna High Court CWJC No.35 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
2/5
having rejected the revision application, the petitioner has moved
this Court.
Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
vehicle in question is a Tractor bearing Registration No. BR45GB-
1553, Chassis No. MBNAK48ACPTF04892, Engine No.
CJ.1354/PE004564. On 15.12.2023, the vehicle was intercepted by
a police party. The allegation is that the vehicle was engaged in
transportation of 261 liters of country made liquor. The driver of
the vehicle was arrested. On the basis of his self-statement, the S.I.
of Police registered Mohania P.S. Case No. 868 of 2023 dated
15.12.2023 (Annexure ‘P/1’).
4. It is the case of the petitioner that he is engaged in
agricultural work. For the release of the vehicle, the petitioner filed
an application before the Collector-cum-District Magistrate,
Kaimur. It is submitted that such application was filed in terms of
Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (as
amended up to date) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules of 2021
(as amended up to date)’). A report was called for from the S.H.O.
of the concerned police station. In his report, the S.H.O. opposed
the prayer for release of the vehicle.
Patna High Court CWJC No.35 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
3/5
5. Learned counsel submits that even as the Confiscating
Authority had not issued any notice proposing to confiscate the
vehicle in question and no opportunity to show case was given in
the confiscation matter to the petitioner, the Confiscating Authority
while rejecting the request of the petitioner to release the vehicle
in question on the ground of the provision contained in sub-rule
(3) of Rule 12A of the Rules of 2021 (as amended up to date),
simultaneously passed an order of confiscation of the vehicle.
6. It is submitted that in the counter affidavit filed by the
respondent State and its authorities, there is no averment that any
notice to show cause was issued in confiscation matter.
7. Learned counsel submits that this being the position,
the order of confiscation suffers from procedural infirmity and is
liable to be set aside.
Submission on behalf of the State
8. Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, learned AC to AAG-3 for
the State submits that the vehicle in question was found engaged in
transportation of huge quantity of liquor i.e. 261 liters. In such
circumstance, if the Confiscating Authority has decided to
confiscate the vehicle in question, no fault may be found with the
same.
Patna High Court CWJC No.35 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
4/5
Consideration
9. Having regard to the entire pleadings available on the
record, we are of the opinion that the order of confiscation suffers
from violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as it
appears that in the confiscation matter, no notice to show cause
was issued to the petitioner. It was the petitioner who had
approached the Confiscating Authority under Rule 12A of the
Rules of 2021 (as amended up to date) for release of the vehicle
which was refused citing sub-rule (3) of Rule 12A of the Rules of
2021 (as amended up to date). At this stage, the Confiscating
Authority became functus officio insofar as the application was
concerned but the Confiscating Authority did not stop there, he
continued with the order and considered the matter of confiscation.
10. In the considered opinion of this Court, a notice to
show cause was required to be issued in the confiscation matter
and only after hearing the petitioner or his authorised
representative/counsel in the confiscation matter, an appropriate
order would have been passed. This has not been done. In result,
the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. The
impugned orders as contained in Annexures ‘P3’, ‘P4’ and ‘P5’ are
hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the Confiscating
Authority to consider the application for release of the vehicle
Patna High Court CWJC No.35 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
5/5
afresh keeping in view the judgment of this Court in the case of
Manjeet Kumar Yadav Vs. The State of Bihar and Others in
CWJC No. 10126 of 2025. The Confiscating Authority shall first
decide on the application for release within a period of one month
from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order.
11. So far as the confiscation proceeding is concerned, it
will be open to the Confiscating Authority to proceed with the
confiscation matter separately by issuing notice to the petitioner
calling upon him to submit his response. A reasoned order in
confiscation matter shall be passed by the Confiscating Authority
after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/his
authorised representative/counsel.
12. This writ application is allowed to the extent
indicated hereinabove.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
lekhi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 13.05.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.