Partly allowed¶27

Bechan Mukhiya v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Feb 2025CR. APP (SJ)/770/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bechan Mukhiya v. State of Bihar; Patna High Court Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.770 of 2019; decided 20-02-2025; Justice Sandeep Kumar; sentence modification; Section 47A Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2015 versus Bihar Excise Act 1915; occurrence dated 21.09.2010; first offence; excise/wine recovery; Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2010; S.T. Excise Case No. 674 of 2017; Supaul; conviction sustained; sentence reduced to three months R.I. and Rs. 500 fine; release after service of sentence including remission.

What did the court decide?

Conviction sustained; sentence reduced from three years' R.I. with Rs. 5000/- fine to three months' R.I. with Rs. 500/- fine; appellant directed to be released forthwith if he has already undergone three months' R.I. including remission and is not wanted in any other case. ¶27

Bechan Mukhiya Vs the State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether, the occurrence being dated 21.09.2010, the appellant should have been dealt with under the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 rather than convicted under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2015, counsel submitting there was no such applicable act. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

The appeal is partly allowed and the appellant's conviction is sustained; counsel had expressly confined his arguments to the punishment and did not challenge the conviction.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5000/- is modified to rigorous imprisonment for three months with a fine of Rs. 500/-.

¶25

Key takeaways

If the appellant has already undergone three months' rigorous imprisonment including remission and is not wanted in any other case, he is to be released forthwith.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.770 of 2019, decided 20-02-2025 by Sandeep Kumar, J. Appeal by Bechan Mukhiya against his conviction under Section 47A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2015 and sentence of three years' R.I. with Rs. 5000/- fine (judgment dated 23.01.2019, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Supaul, in S.T. Excise Case No. 674 of 2017, arising out of Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2010; occurrence dated 21.09.2010; huge quantity of wine recovered from the appellant's house). Counsel contended that, the occurrence pre-dating the 2015 Act, the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 governed the case, and that as a first offender the appellant could only have been punished with three months' imprisonment and Rs. 500/- fine under Section 47A of the 1915 Act; arguments were expressly limited to punishment, the conviction not being challenged. The Court partly allowed the appeal: conviction sustained, sentence modified to three months' R.I. with Rs. 500/- fine, and the appellant directed to be released forthwith if he has already undergone three months' R.I. including remission and is not wanted in any other case.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.770 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2010 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul

¶3

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

¶4

Bechan Mukhiya Son Of Chhutaharu Mukhiya Resident Of VillageNemanma, P.S.-Kishanpur, District- Supaul.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

7 20-02-2025

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.01.2019 passed by 2^nd Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Supaul in S.T. Excise Case No. 674 of 2017 arising out of Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2010 convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 47A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2015 and sentenced him to undergo three years R.I. along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment of three months.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, huge quantity of wine was recovered from the house of the appellant.

¶16

At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the case the date of occurrence is

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.770 of 2019(7) dt.20-02-2025 2/3

¶18

21.09.2010 and the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 is applicable in the case of the appellant but the Trial Judge has convicted the appellant under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2015 whereas there is no such act.

¶19

It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the case of the appellant should have been considered under the Bihar Excise Act, 1915. He further submits that the appellant has remained in custody for one year, one month and 10 days and this being the first offence having been committed by the appellant, he could have been imposed a punishment of imprisonment for three months with a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 47A of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915.

¶20

The learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that he limits his arguments to the punishment awarded to the appellant and he does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellant meaning thereby that the appellant accepts his conviction.

¶21

He further submits that since the offence is the first offence and the punishment which could have been imposed upon the appellant is of three months along with a fine of Rs. 500/-. The punishment in the present case should be altered from Three Years along with fine of Rs 5000/- to three months

¶22

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.770 of 2019(7) dt.20-02-2025 3/3

¶23

along with a fine of Rs. 500/-.

¶24

Learned APP in view of the position of the law has no answer to the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶25

Considering the aforesaid, this appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant is sustained but the sentence awarded to the appellant is modified to the extent that the sentence awarded to the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment from three years along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- is modified to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months along with a fine of Rs. 500/-.

¶26

If the appellant has already undergone rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months including the period of remission etc., and if he is not wanted in any other case, he is directed to be released forthwith.

¶27

The appeal stands partly allowed.

¶28

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶29

Shishir/-

¶30

U T

Bechan Mukhiya v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bechan Mukhiya v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raushan Kumar Yadav @ Roshan Kumar Yadav @ Roshan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Sada Vs The State of Bihar

Umakant Dubey Vs The State of Bihar

Kamal Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Anjali Kumari Vs The State of Bihar