Bihar Prohibition Act | Vehicle Cannot Be Confiscated Unless Owner's Involvement In Illicit Liquor Transport Is Proven: Patna High Court
Rushil Batra
12 Feb 2026 6:52 PM IST
The Patna High Court has held that where the owner of a vehicle is not involved in the commission of the offence of transportation of illicit liquor, and there is no consent or connivance attributable to the owner, the vehicle cannot be subjected to confiscation proceedings under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
A Division Bench of Justice Mohit Kumar Shah and Justice Alok Kumar Pandey was hearing a writ petition seeking quashing of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in an excise case, by which the petitioner's motorcycle had been confiscated and put up for auction.
The petitioner submitted that his motorcycle had been stolen on 09 May 2022 from Puran Chapra Market, for which he had duly lodged an FIR. He later came to know that the same motorcycle had been seized in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 470 of 2023 dated 15 September 2023, registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 against four accused persons, from whom 11.160 litres of illicit liquor were allegedly recovered from the said motorcycle.
On this basis, confiscation proceedings were initiated and the impugned order dated 05 January 2024 was passed. It was argued that since the motorcycle had been stolen much prior to the date of its seizure, and since the petitioner's name did not figure in the FIR, it could not be inferred that the petitioner had either consented to, or was in any manner complicit in, the alleged transportation of illicit liquor.
Accepting the submission, the High Court placed reliance on a coordinate Bench decision in Sunaina v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2024 SCC OnLine Pat 851), wherein it was held that in the absence of involvement of the vehicle owner in the alleged offence or illegal use of the vehicle, confiscation proceedings cannot be sustained. The Court noted:
“We find from the law laid down in the case of Sunaina (supra), that involvement or connivance of the owner of the vehicle in illegal use of the vehicle for ferrying illicit liquor is an essential prerequisite for confiscation of the vehicle or imposing any penalty for release of the vehicle. As far as the present case is concerned, admittedly the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-State does not show that either the petitioner is an accused in FIR bearing Kuchaikote P.S. Case No.470 of 2023 or he is in anyway involved in commission of the alleged offence…the confiscating authority could not have passed the order of confiscation, especially in absence of any material to show any direct or indirect involvement of the petitioner/owner of the vehicle in commission of the alleged offence.”
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the impugned confiscation order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and directed that the petitioner's motorcycle be released within a period of two weeks.
Case Title: Md. Hasmuddeen Ali v. State of Bihar and Ors.
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14374 of 2025.
Appearance: Mr. Sumit Shekhar Pandey, Mr. Masoom Raza, Ms. Shruti Singh and Mr. Mirza Ahraz Baig appeared for the Petitioner. AC to the Standing Counsel appeared for the Respondent.