Disposed¶8

Aman Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2026CWJC/6833/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CWJC No. 6833 of 2026, decided 01-07-2026, coram Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Kumar Manish (order per Rajeev Ranjan Prasad). Subject: release of seized Toto vehicle; Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, Section 30(a); Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, Rule 12A; alternative statutory remedy; competent authority; prescribed format application; 30-day timelines; Phulwarisharif (Janipur) P.S. Case No. 2146 of 2025; writ disposed of. No precedents cited; no monetary quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

Permission to file an application before the competent authority for release of the seized Toto vehicle within 30 days; the competent authority to decide such application within 30 days of filing, guided by the rules and judicial pronouncements on the subject. ¶8

Aman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6833 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Aman Kumar Son of Nirmal Kumar, Resident of village- Bhushahula, PostKarwan, Police Station - Ara Muffasil, District- Bhojpur at Ara.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Excise Commissioner, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, District- Patna.

¶9

The Assistant Excise Commissioner, Patna, District- Patna.

¶10

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, District- Patna.

¶11

The District Transport Officer, Patna, District- Patna.

¶12

The Station Head Officer, Janipur Police Station, District- Patna.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar (AC to GA-11)

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUMAR MANISH ORAL ORDER

¶20

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

¶21

2 01-07-2026

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶23

A.C. to G.A.-11 for the State.

¶24

The petitioner in this case is seeking release of the Toto vehicle which has been seized in connection with Phulwarisharif (Janipur) P.S. Case No. 2146 of 2025 dated 30.12.2025 under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (as amended up-to-date).

¶25

It appears that the petitioner is aware of the Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (as amended up-

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.6833 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/2

¶27

to-date) but he has not preferred an application in the prescribed format before the competent authority for release of the vehicle.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to file an appropriate application before the competent authority within a period of 30 days from today.

¶29

Permission is granted. The petitioner may avail the alternative statutory remedy available to him in accordance with law.

¶30

If such an application is preferred within a period of 30 days from today, the competent authority shall decide the same within a period of 30 days from the date of filing of the application.

¶31