[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Kiran Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 8 December, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13902 of 2025
======================================================
Kiran Kumari Wife of Ranjeet Kumar, Resident of Village/Mohalla- Shivpuri
Damuchak Lane No.1 P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Collector, Sitamarhi.
5. The S.D.M, Pupri, Sitamarhi.
6. The S.S.P., Muzaffarpur.
7. The S.S.P., Sitamarhi.
8. The SHO, Mithanpura, P.S- Muzaffarpur.
9. The SHO, Bajpatti, P.S- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. AC to Standing Counsel 28
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 08-12-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC
to SC-28 for the State of Bihar.
2. While hearing the writ application on 20.11.2025, this
Court passed the following order:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned SC-28 for the State.
2. The petitioner in this case is aggrieved by
and dissatisfied with the order dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.13902 of 2025 dt.08-12-2025
2/5
27.09.2023
passed by the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Pupri, Sitamarhi in Excise
Confiscation Case No. 158 of 2023 by which
the vehicle in question is said to have been
confiscated.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that till date, the vehicle has not been auction
sold and, in fact, he was seeking release of
the vehicle in question on legal advice before
the concerned court of learned Magistrate at
Muzaffarpur who is dealing with Mithanpura
P.S. Case No. 276 of 2023. The said case was
lodged by the petitioner alleging theft of his
motorcycle parked near Big Bazar at
Muzaffarpur. The said motorcycle was later
on recovered with the illicit liquor from the
district of Sitamarhi.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner had
appeared before the Confiscating Authority
and proposed to pay the penalty but she was
told that an order of confiscation had already
been passed. It is submitted that the
petitioner had also filed a show cause before
the S.D.M., Pupri but ignoring the show
cause filed by the petitioner, the impugned
order has been passed in haste and a wrong
averment has been made in the impugned
order that despite notice, the petitioner did
not file any objection or show cause.
5. Learned SC-28 for the State submits that
the petitioner has moved this Court against
the impugned order after a period of two
years, therefore, it is not known whether the
vehicle in question is still lying in the police
station or it has already been auction sold.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13902 of 2025 dt.08-12-2025
6. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we
direct the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri
to file a counter affidavit within two weeks
from today stating the correct facts and the
present status of the vehicle in question. If
the vehicle in question has not been auction
sold, the S.D.M., Pupri and the District
Magistrate, Sitamarhi shall ensure that the
vehicle is not auction sold during pendency
of the writ application.
7. List this case on 08th December, 2025
under the same heading maintaining its
position."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, a counter affidavit has
been filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. In paragraph
'6' of the counter affidavit, it has been made clear that the vehicle
has yet not been auctioned. Further, the deponent has undertaken
that the same shall not be auctioned during pendency of the
present writ petition.
4. As regards the query of this Court as contained in
paragraph '4' of the order dated 20.11.2025, nothing has been
stated in the counter affidavit.
5. We, therefore, understand that the submission made
on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner had proposed to pay
the penalty but she was told that an order of confiscation had
already been passed and further submission that the petitioner had
Patna High Court CWJC No.13902 of 2025 dt.08-12-2025
filed a show cause before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri are
correct submissions.
6. We have also perused the ordersheets of the court of
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri, Sitamarhi as contained in
Annexure 'P-5' to the writ application. In the order dated
18.08.2023, it is recorded that the vehicle owner is present and has
submitted an application in respect of the confiscated Hero
Glamour Motorcycle but no application in Form IV has been filed.
It is evident from perusal of the records that prior to filing of the
application by the owner, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri had
issued show cause notice to the owner.
7. The order of confiscation has been passed on
27.09.2023 in the light of the proposal received in this regard from
the Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi. It has been wrongly
recorded in the order dated 27.09.2023 that no objection or show
cause had been submitted by the owner of the vehicle. In our
considered opinion, the application, whatsoever was filed on
behalf of the vehicle owner on 18.08.2023, was required to be
considered by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri while passing
the order of confiscation. Non-consideration of the application of
the vehicle owner has rendered the order of confiscation suffering
Patna High Court CWJC No.13902 of 2025 dt.08-12-2025
from jurisdictional error. It also suffers from violation of principles
of natural justice, hence, it is liable to be held bad in law.
8. We set aside the impugned order dated 27.09.2023
(Annexure 'P-6') by which the vehicle in question has been
confiscated.
9. The petitioner is given liberty to file an application in
the prescribed Form IV for release of the vehicle in question
before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pupri within a period of 30
days from today. If such an application is filed, the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Pupri shall consider the same and pass an appropriate
order in terms of Rule 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Rules, 2021 (as amended up to date) within one month from the
date of filing of the application.
10. In the meantime, the vehicle in question shall not be
auctioned.
11. This writ application is allowed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
lekhi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 09.12.2025
Transmission Date
