Patna High Court
Sanyukta SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
The scooty cannot be confiscated; the owner, not being involved in the theft or liquor offence, is entitled to its release without penalty.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanyukta Singh, owner of a scooty that was stolen and later recovered by police while being used to transport illicit liquor, filed a writ of mandamus seeking its release. The scooty had been seized under Sections 30(a), 41 and 56(b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The State admitted that the petitioner was not involved in either the theft or the liquor offence. The Court held that, in line with earlier judgments, a stolen vehicle cannot be confiscated when the owner is not culpable. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the Confiscating Authority for release of the vehicle without any penalty, and allowed the writ to the extent indicated.
Issues considered
- Whether a vehicle stolen from its owner and later seized in a liquor case can be confiscated under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 when the owner is not involved.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the release of such a vehicle.
- Whether the owner of a stolen vehicle is liable to any penalty under the Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a), 41, 56(b)
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- confiscation
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- stolen vehicle
- owner liability
- illegal liquor transport
- vehicle seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5477 of 2026
======================================================
Sanyukta Singh, Wife of Satish Kumar Singh, Resident of 3 SFA Block
No.01, Flat No.15, Bahadurpur Housing Colony, Police Station- Agamkuan,
District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Prohibition of Excise and
Registration Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Patna.
4. The Station House Officer, Agamkuan Police Station, District Patna.
5. The Station House Officer, Excise Police Station Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Dinesh Maharaj, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad Yadav, SC-23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
SC-23 for the State.
2. The petitioner in the present writ application is
seeking writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents to release the scooty bearing Registration No. BR
01-CM 2809, Engine No. JF39E71026922, Chassis No.
ME4JF393FF7026858, which has been seized in connection
with Prohibition and Excise Patna Police Station Case No. 4252
of 2025 dated 18.12.2025 under Sections 30(a), 41 and 56(b) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (as amended up-to-
Patna High Court CWJC No.5477 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/4
date).
3. The facts of the case are not in dispute, hence, this
writ application is being disposed of at this stage.
4. According to the petitioner, the scooty bearing
Registration No. BR 01-CM 2809, Engine No. JF39E71026922,
Chassis No. ME4JF393FF7026858 is registered in the name of
the petitioner. The said scooty was stolen away from the parking
place of the building in which the petitioner is residing. In the
CCTV footage, two unknown miscreants were found taking
away the scooty. This has been brought to the notice of the SHO
of Agamkuan Police Station where Aghamkuan P.S. Case No.
672 of 2025 has been registered on 10.09.2025. In this case,
police has submitted a final form finding that the involvement of
the petitioner has not come and subsequently, the same scooty
has been recovered by police while carrying about 272 liters of
liquors. In connection with the liquor case, the scooty has been
seized. In this case also the involvement of the petitioner has not
been found.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even
as the petitioner has already registered one FIR in connection
with the theft of the scooty, the competent authority has initiated
a confiscation proceeding without realizing that in case of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5477 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/4
stolen vehicles, this Court has in catena of judgments held that
owner of the stolen vehicle cannot be held liable for penalty or
confiscation of the vehicle. Reference in this regard has been
made in the case of Manju Devi vs. The State of Bihar and
Ors. (CWJC No. 15337 of 2025), Bimlesh Kumar versus The
State of Bihar and Ors. (CWJC No. 19659 of 2025), Prasant
Kishore Thakur versus The State of Bihar and Ors. (CWJC
No. 14985 of 2025) reported in 2025 SCC OnLine Pat 3653
and Khushboo Rani vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. (CWJC
No. 1860 of 2025).
6. Learned SC-23 for the State does not dispute that
the petitioner is the owner of the scooty in question, the said
scooty was stolen away for which a first information report has
been lodged in Agamkuan Police Station. It is also not disputed
that in the said first information report, police has submitted a
final form, the involvement of the petitioner has not come in
course of investigation.
7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances
and the admitted position as recorded hereinabove, we are of the
considered opinion that the scooty bearing Registration No. BR
01-CM 2809, Engine No. JF39E71026922, Chassis No.
ME4JF393FF7026858, which has been seized in connection
Patna High Court CWJC No.5477 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
4/4
with Prohibition and Excise Patna Police Station Case No. 4252
of 2025 dated 18.12.2025 cannot be subjected to confiscation.
The petitioner may file an application before the Confiscating
Authority who has issued notice and bring the entire materials to
the knowledge of the Confiscating Authority who will consider
the application and pass an order for release of the vehicle in
question within a period of one week from the date of
submission of the application. The competent authority shall
keep in mind that if the petitioner is not found involved in either
theft of the vehicle or in the transportation of the illicit liquor,
the vehicle in question would be liable to be released without
demanding any penalty from the petitioner. Such orders be
passed within the stipulated period.
8. This writ application stands allowed to the extent
indicated hereinabove.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Soni Shrivastava, J)
SUSHMA2/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.