Patna High Court
Kanija Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 18 March, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Alok Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19367 of 2024
======================================================
Kanija Devi, Wife of Shailendra Paswan @ Valay Paswan, Resident of
Maghra, Police Station Deepnagar, District-Nalanda, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and
Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Excise Commissioner, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Nalanda.
5. The Additional Collector cum Additional District Magistrate, Nalanda.
6. The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda.
7. The Excise Superintendent, Nalanda.
8. The Circle Officer, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda.
9. The Officer in Charge, Deepnagar, Nalanda.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Swarup Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to G.P. 3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 18-03-2025
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:
"i. For issuance of appropriate
Writ/Writs, direction/directions or orders/order
especially in the nature of Certiorari, for quashing
& setting aside the ex-parte order dated 30/7/2024
Patna High Court CWJC No.19367 of 2024 dt.18-03-2025
passed by the respondent no. 5. Additional
Collector-cum-Additional District Magistrate in
Confiscation (Excise) Case No. 38/2024 emanating
from Deepnagar Police Station Case No. 392/2023
dated 25/8/2023 registered under section 30 (A) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (in
short "the Bihar Excise Act"), whereby and
whereunder the part of the petitioner's house has
been confiscated and Excise Superintendent has
been directed under section 58 (5) of the Excise Act
to get prepare the full particulars of part of the
said confiscated house and thereupon get assess its
minimum floor price by the Executive Engineer,
Building Division, Bihar Shariff and the District
Sub-Registrar, Nalanda and submit the challan in
lieu of deposition of auction amount to the treasury
upon public auction of the said confiscated house;
ii. Upon issuance of a writ of
certiorari quashing the impugned ex-parte order
dt. 30/7/2024, a writ of mandamus be issued on the
respondent no.5, Additional Collector-cum-
Additional District Magistrate by directing him to
adjudicate the Confiscation Case No. 38/2024
afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to
the writ petitioner;
iii. For issuance of appropriate
Writ/Writs, directions/directions or order/orders to
hold and declare that the very initiation of
Confiscation (Excise) Case No. 38/2024-State v.
Kanija Devi against the petitioner was
Patna High Court CWJC No.19367 of 2024 dt.18-03-2025
misconceived, void and non-maintainable on the
ground that the petitioner is not the owner of the
house in question from where she was said to have
been found with liquor;
iv. For issuance of appropriate
Writ/Writs, direction/directions or orders/order
especially in the nature of Mandamus directing the
Respondents to release the part of the premise of
confiscated house in question;
V. For any other relief/reliefs, which
the Hon'ble court may grant in general interest,
that may be deemed appropriate and necessary in
this case."
2. Petitioner is stated to be daughter-in-law of the
landlord of the subject matter of land, which is involved for the
offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The
concerned authority proceeded to confiscate the subject land
without hearing the owner of the land. The entire confiscation
proceedings stands in the name of petitioner. Ultimately, if the
confiscation order is required to be implemented, in that event,
right of the land owner would be affected and he has to be heard
in the matter and he is not before this Court. Perusal of the facts
and analysis of material, it is evident that petitioner - Kanija
Devi is not landlord of the subject land. Therefore, the State-
Respondents cannot execute the confiscation proceedings
against the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.19367 of 2024 dt.18-03-2025
3. In the light of these facts and circumstances, the
petitioner has no locus insofar as confiscation proceedings read
with the fact that confiscation of subject land. Accordingly, the
present Writ petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the
land owner to agitate his right before appropriate Forum and in
accordance with law.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
manish/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.03.2025
Transmission Date NA
