Patna High Court
Naval Kishor YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
A vehicle is liable to confiscation only when it is found engaged in the transportation of liquor; therefore, the confiscation proceeding against the motorcycle must be halted.
Summary
The petitioner, Naval Kishor Yadav, owned a Yamaha R15 motorcycle that was seized by the Babubarhi police after he fled the scene when they intercepted his pickup van carrying illicit liquor. The petitioner argued that the motorcycle was not used to transport liquor and should be released, while the State contended that the seizure was justified because the petitioner abandoned the bike and fled, initiating a confiscation proceeding. The court examined the facts and held that under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, a vehicle can be confiscated only if it is found to be engaged in the transportation of liquor. Since no liquor was found on the motorcycle, the confiscation proceeding could not continue. The court directed the petitioner to apply for release under Rule 12(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2016, and disposed of the writ application.
Issues considered
- Whether the seizure and confiscation of the motorcycle is permissible under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act when the vehicle was not used to transport illicit liquor.
- Whether the confiscation proceeding against the motorcycle can lawfully continue.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (as amended) — s. 30(a), 41
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2016 — s. 12(A)
Subjects
- seizure
- confiscation
- motor vehicle
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- writ jurisdiction
- release of seized property
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5440 of 2026
======================================================
Naval Kishor Yadav Son of Mahesh Yadav, Resident of Village- Jogiya, P.S.-
Ladaniya, District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Development of
Registration and Excise, Government of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Madhubani.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Madhubani.
5. The S.H.O. Babubarhi Police Station, District- Madhubani.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sharfaraj Ahmad, Advocate
Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Uday Shankar Singh, GP-19
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUMAR MANISH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
2 07-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner in this case is seeking the following
relief(s):-
(i) For commanding the respondent authorities to
release the YAMAHA R15 motorcycle bearing
Registration No. BR32AX 8119, in favour of the
petitioner who is the owner of the motorcycle in
question and said vehicle was seized of pursuance
to Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 460 of 2025 dated
07.10.2025 for the offence alleged registered
under section 30(a), 41 of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act. In this way vehicle in question
has been parked in the premise of Babubarhi
Police Station causing decay of motorcycle on day
to day as the same has been parked in open space
Patna High Court CWJC No.5440 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
without any use and in absence of any state
hanger.
(ii) An for grant any other relief(s) as per the facts
and circumstances of this case.”
3. It appears that the S.H.O. of Babubarhi Police
Station intercepted a white colour Pickup van which was
carrying illicit liquor of 2006.640 litres. It is alleged that this
petitioner is the owner of the said Pickup van and he was
personally escorting the vehicle. He was riding a YAMAHA R15
motorcycle. After seeing the police party, the petitioner fled away
leaving his motorcycle which has also been seized by police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is
evident from the facts of the case that the motorcycle was not
transporting any liquor. The liquors have been found allegedly
loaded on the Pickup van. It is his submission that so far as the
motorcycle is concerned, it may be ordered to be released.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State,
submits that the motorcycle has been seized not for carrying the
illicit liquor but because it was found that the petitioner was
riding the said motorcycle and he was coming behind the Pickup
vehicle. On seeing the Police vehicle, petitioner had left his
motorcycle and fled away. Learned counsel for the State submits
that in such circumstance, the motorcycle has been seized and a
confiscation proceeding has been initiated.
6. We have considered the rival submissions at the Bar.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5440 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
The admitted position is that no liquor was being transported by
the motorcycle in question. In such circumstance, the motorcycle
cannot be liable for confiscation.
7. We, therefore, direct that the confiscation
proceeding shall not continue against the motorcycle in question.
8. If the petitioner applies for release of the motorcycle
in the prescribed format in terms of Rule 12(A) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2016 (as amended up-to-date)
before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and
disposed of by a reasoned order within a period of 30 days from
the date of filing of the application. The competent authority
shall keep in mind that under the provisions of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (as amended upto date), a
vehicle is liable to be confiscated only when it is found engaged
in transportation of liquor.
9. This writ application stands disposed of accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Kumar Manish, J)
Ranjeet/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.