Rajeev Kumar Gupta @ Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Gupta @ Rajiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rajeev Kumar Gupta @ Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Gupta @ Rajiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ application disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner files an application in the prescribed proposal form for release of the vehicle, the competent authority (Respondent No. 2, the District Magistrate, Gopalganj) or any officer authorised by him shall consider it and pass an appropriate order within one month from the date of filing of the application with the proposal for release.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to release the petitioner's Swift Car bearing Registration No. DL5CM0357, seized in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025 under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. +1 more

Court's answer

The law provides for finalization of the confiscation proceeding within a period of three months from the date of seizure of the vehicle.

Ratio / Principle

Since the confiscation proceeding (required to be finalized within three months of seizure on 21.02.2025) was not finalized, the fault lies with the respondents and not with the petitioner.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner files an application in the prescribed proposal form for release of the vehicle, the competent authority (Respondent No. 2) or any other officer authorised by him shall consider it and pass an appropriate order within one month from the date of filing of the application with the proposal for release.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — S. 30(a) — Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 — Rule 12A — writ petition for release of Swift Car (Reg. No. DL5CM0357) seized on 21.02.2025 in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025 with recovery of 70.5 litres of liquor — petitioner had not approached the competent authority under Rule 12A and no confiscation proceeding had been initiated — law requires finalization of confiscation proceeding within three months of seizure; failure to do so is the fault of the respondents, not the petitioner — writ disposed of directing that on the petitioner filing an application in the prescribed proposal form, the competent authority (Respondent No. 2) or authorised officer shall consider it and pass an appropriate order within one month.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20283 of 2025

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

Rajeev Kumar Gupta @ Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Gupta @ Rajiv Kumar S/oLate Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Resident of Vill- Vishanpur, P.S.- Bela, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

The Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.

The Officer in Charge of Kuchaikote Police Station, District- Gopalganj.

... ... Respondents

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

Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Dheerendra Kumar, AC to GP-5

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

2 19-12-2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP-5 for the State.

2. The petitioner in the present case is seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to release the Swift Car of the petitioner bearing Registration No. DL5CM0357, Chassis No. MA3EHKD1S00886139, Engine No. K12MN1586110.

3. It appears that the vehicle in question has been seized in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (as amended up to date). It is alleged that from the Swift Car, altogether 70.5 litres of liquor have been recovered.

Patna High Court CWJC No.20283 of 2025(2) dt.19-12-2025 2/2

4. It appears from the averments in the writ application that the petitioner has not approached the competent authority for release of the vehicle in terms of Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (as amended up to date). It is stated that till date, no confiscation proceeding has been initiated.

5. We find from the record that in this case, the seizure has taken place as back as on 21.02.2025. The law provides for finalization of confiscation proceeding within a period of three months from the date of seizure of the vehicle, therefore, if it has not been done, it is the fault of the respondents and not of the petitioner.

6. In case, the petitioner files an application in the prescribed proposal form for release of the vehicle, the same shall be considered by the competent authority (Respondent No. 2) or any other officer authorised by him and an appropriate order shall be passed thereon within a period of one month from the date of filing of the application with the proposal for release.

7. This writ application stands disposed of accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

lekhi/-

U