Disposed¶24

Amir Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 May 2024CWJC/6436/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CWJC 6436 of 2024; premature writ petition; writ of mandamus; release of excise-seized bike BR-28-AC-5644; wrongful seizure by Police; Barauli P.S. Case No. 56/2024; Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022; Rule 12A Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021; amended sub Rule 2 of Rule 12A (2022, 2023); no demand before competent authority; speaking order within two weeks; Gopalganj; disposed as premature.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition stands disposed of as premature, with the petitioner left free to invoke the Rule 12A remedy and a two-week speaking-order direction to the competent authority upon receipt of a prescribed-form application. ¶24

Amir Hussain Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ petition seeking mandamus for release and discharge of the seized vehicle from charges is maintainable, or is premature, in the absence of any demand/application by the petitioner before the competent authority (particularly under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, read with amended sub Rule 2 of Rule 12A of 2022 and 2023).

¶24

Court's answer

In the absence of a demand before the competent authority, particularly under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended sub Rule 2 of Rule 12A (2022 and 2023), the present writ petition for writ of mandamus is not maintainable or is pre-mature.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Disposal of the petition as premature would not be a hurdle for the petitioner to invoke the remedy under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, including its amended provisions of 2022 and 2023.

¶25

Key takeaways

If the petitioner submits an application in the prescribed form before the competent authority, the competent authority shall pass a speaking order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6436 of 2024, decided 14-05-2024 (oral judgment per P. B. Bajanthri; bench included Alok Kumar Pandey): Petitioner Amir Hussain sought mandamus directing the respondents to release and discharge from charges his motorcycle (Regn. No. BR-28-AC-5644), allegedly wrongly seized by Police in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 56/2024, instituted on 04.02.2024, for offences alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022. The court observed that no demand had been made before the competent authority, particularly under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended sub Rule 2 of Rule 12A (2022 and 2023); consequently the mandamus petition was held not maintainable/premature and disposed of as premature. The court further held that the disposal would not be a hurdle to the petitioner invoking the Rule 12A remedy (including amended 2022/2023 provisions), and that upon submission of a prescribed-form application the competent authority shall pass a speaking order within two weeks from receipt. NAFR.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6436 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Amir Hussain S/o- Md. Tasauwar Resident of Barauli, P.S.- Barauli, DistrictGopalganj.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise and Prohibition Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Additional Chief Secretary, Excise Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

¶9

¶10

The Excise Commissioner, Head Quarter, Bihar, Patna.

¶11

District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

¶12

The Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.

¶13

The Superintendent of Police, Excise, Gopalganj.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Adarsh Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (20)

¶16

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)

¶17

Date : 14-05-2024

¶18

In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

¶19

the following reliefs:-

¶20

A. For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to release and discharge the property from any charges lebelled on the Bike Registration No. BR-28-AC-5644 which has been wrongly seized by Police in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 56/2024 instituted on dated 04.02.2024 for the offences alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.6436 of 2024 dt.14-05-2024 2/3

¶22

B. For issuance of any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioners are found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶23

In support of aforementioned relief, there is no demand before the competent authority in particularly under Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended sub Rule 2 of Rule 12A in the year 2022 and 2023.

¶24

In the absence of demand before the competent authority, the present writ petition for writ of mandamus is not maintainable or it is pre-mature. Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of as premature.

¶25

Disposal of the present petition would not be a hurdle for the petitioner to invoke remedy under Rule 12A of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 including amended provisions in the year 2022 and 2023. If such application is submitted in the prescribed form before the competent authority, the competent authority shall pass speaking order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.6436 of 2024 dt.14-05-2024 3/3

¶27