Patna High Court
Kapil Dev ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The writ petition may be withdrawn, the petitioner may file a statutory appeal within a month, and the confiscating authority shall not proceed with auction of the property for six weeks.
Summary
Petitioner Kapil Dev Chaudhary filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the release of a 110 sq. ft. land parcel seized under Rule 12B of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2021, and a stay on the confiscation order dated 27.01.2026. The court observed that the confiscating authority had already issued a confiscation order on 07.01.2026, which is appealable before the Excise Commissioner, and the petition did not seek its setting aside. The petitioner requested to withdraw the writ and instead file a statutory appeal, also asking for protection against the imminent auction of the land. The court allowed the withdrawal, permitted the petitioner to file an appeal within one month, and ordered that the confiscating authority not proceed with the auction for six weeks. The writ application was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking release of seized land can be withdrawn in favour of filing a statutory appeal.
- Whether interim relief can be granted to restrain auction of the seized property pending appeal.
- Whether the confiscating authority must stay execution of the confiscation order during the pendency of the appeal.
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- land confiscation
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- interim relief
- appeal
- auction stay
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4869 of 2026
======================================================
Kapil Dev Chaudhary Son of Madhumangal Chaudhari, resident of Village-
Fatehpur Saraiya, P.S- Manjhi, District-Saran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and
Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, District Saran at Chapra.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, District Saran at Chapra.
5. The Additional District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.
6. The Officer In-Charge, Manjhi Police Station, Saran.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, AC to GP-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
2 24-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
AC to GP-5 for the State of Bihar.
2. The petitioner in the present writ application is
seeking the following reliefs:-
“(i) For issuance of order/s, direction/s or
appropriate writ, including writ in the nature of
mandamus to direct the respondent to release the
fraction part of Khata No. 21, Kheshra No. 256, total
area 110 Sq. Ft. in Mauza Fatehpur in terms of Rule
12B of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2021 (as
amended Rules, 2022) which has been seized in
connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 390/2024
Patna High Court CWJC No.4869 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/3
dated 07.12.2024 registered under Section 30(a) of
the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2022.
(ii) To direct the respondent to stay over the order
dated 27.01.2026 passed in Excise Confiscation
Case No. 345 by Additional District Magistrate,
Saran.
(iii) For any other relief/s by which the petitioner
found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the
present case.”
3. In course of hearing, it is noticed that the
Confiscating Authority has already passed an order of
confiscation on 07.01.2026 in Excise Confiscation Case No. 345
of 2025. The said order of confiscation is an appealable order
before the Excise Commissioner (Appeals). In the writ
application, also there is no prayer for setting aside of the order
of confiscation.
4. Having noticed this, learned counsel for the
petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ application and
allow him to prefer an appeal against the order of confiscation.
It is submitted that the land in question is going to be auction
sold, therefore, this Court may grant some protection to the
petitioner from the auction sale of the land in question.
5. Learned AC to GP-5 for the State is present. It is
submitted that the petitioner may seek interim relief before the
Appellate Authority after filing of a properly constituted appeal.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4869 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
3/3
6. Having regard to the aforementioned submissions,
this Court is of the opinion that the writ application as framed
may be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to
prefer a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority in
accordance with law.
7. If any such appeal is preferred within a period of
one month from today with a prayer for interim relief, the same
shall be considered by the Appellate Authority within a
reasonable period.
8. The District Magistrate/Confiscating Authority
shall not give effect to the order of confiscation and no auction
sale of the property shall be initiated/made for a period of six
weeks from today.
9. In the meantime, the Appellate Authority shall
consider the matter, if preferred within the given period.
10. This writ application stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
lekhi/-
U
Checking your session…