Patna High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 17 - February 23, 2025

Nominal Index:Narendra Kumar Ram vs The State Of Bihar and Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 9Ram Autar Rai vs The State Of Bihar and Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 10Company Ram @ Tiran Ram and ors vs The State of Bihar and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 11Biswajit Kumar Pandey @ Lalu Kumar vs The State of Bihar 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 12Rakesh Rai vs The State of Bihar 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 13Surendra Kumar and Anr vs State of Bihar and anr 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 14Angela Lee Hicks vs. The State of Bihar and others 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 15 Nand Jee Singh and ors vs The State of Bihar and ors 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 16Judgements/Orders:Breath Analyzer Test Is Not Conclusive Proof Of Alcohol Consumption: Patna High Court Quashes FIRCase Title: Narendra Kumar Ram vs The State Of Bihar and OrsLL Citation 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 9The Patna High Court has reiterated that a breathalyzer test alone is not conclusive proof of alcohol consumption and the same cannot be the sole basis of criminal prosecution under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.Justice Bibek Chaudhuri presiding over the case said, “This Court has no other alternative but to hold that the authorities failed to consider the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and based on a breath analyzer report, which cannot be said to be conclusive proof of consumption of alcohol, an F.I.R. has been registered.”Senior Citizens Act | Maintenance Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction Over Complaints Not Seeking Maintenance Or Property Transfer: Patna High CourtCase Title: Ram Autar Rai vs The State Of Bihar and OrsLL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 10The Patna High Court has ruled that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 does not empower the Maintenance Tribunal to entertain complaints that do not seek maintenance or challenge a property transfer. Justice Jitendra Kumar, presiding over the case, observed, “As per the statutory provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, it clearly transpires that the Act has been enacted to provide for effective provision for maintenance and welfare to parents and senior citizens granted and recognized under the constitution and for matters connected therewith and instituted thereto.”“The detail provision of the Act shows that parents and the senior citizens can seek for maintenance from the persons concerned who are liable under the Act or they can also get the transfer of any property made in favour of the person concerned declared void subject to fulfillment of the conditions but none of such relief has been sought for by the applicants,” Justice Kumar added.HAMA | Father-In-Law's Liability To Maintain Widowed Daughter-In-Law Dependent On Income From Co-Parcenary Property: Patna High CourtCase Title: Company Ram @ Tiran Ram and ors vs The State of Bihar and AnrLL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 11The Patna High Court has held that under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) a father-in-law is not automatically liable to pay maintenance to his widowed daughter-in-law unless he has sufficient income from the co-parcenary property.Justice Jitendra Kumar, presiding over the case, emphasized, “Section 19 clearly shows that liability of father-in-law to maintain his daughter-in-law is dependent upon income from the co-parcenary property, if any. But learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no such coparcenary property. There is only one residential house for the joint family where the complainant is free to live. He also submits that the father-in-law is just a pensioner and has no additional means to maintain her daughter-in-law. Moreover, mother-in-law has no liability to maintain her daughter-in-law. Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law.”Juvenile Institutionalization Should Be The Last Resort; Family Is The Best Institution For Rehabilitation: Patna High CourtCase Title: Biswajit Kumar Pandey @ Lalu Kumar vs The State of BiharLL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 12The Patna High Court has held that institutionalization should be a measure of last resort and that the family is the primary institution for the rehabilitation and reintegration of a child in conflict with the law. It thus set aside the rejection of bail for a juvenile accused in a murder case, ruling that the juvenile justice system is reformatory, not punitive.Justice Jitendra Kumar, while delivering the judgment, stated, “Reformatory or Observation Home is one of the measures contemplated by our legislature for reforming and rehabilitating the delinquent children. However, the family of the child in conflict with law has been considered by the legislature as the best and first desirable institution to achieve the object of the Act. Hence, the primary responsibility of care and protection of the child has been given to the biological family or adoptive or foster parents of the child, and it has been contemplated that every child in conflict with law has the right to be reunited with his family at the...

Patna High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 17 - February 23, 2025

Bhavya Singh

Tags