Patna High Court

   

Patna high Court: In a case relating to rising trend of manufacturing and smuggling of liquor in the dry State, Purnendu Singh, J. has observed that the State authorities have failed to implement complete prohibition of liquor in the State of Bihar affecting the health, life and liberty of the people at large.

The Court noted that in its order dated 15.06.2022, it had directed the Chief Secretary to submit a detailed action taken report on or before 27.07.2022 with respect to steps taken for strict implementation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 in its true spirit and the disciplinary action against the officials especially empowered to implement the policy, as the rising trend of manufacturing and smuggling of liquor is due to the deliberate inaction of the State officials.

The Court observed that the ill effects of intoxicants are well established, especially in the Indian society, therefore, the framers of the Constitution considered it fit to include it in express terms in Article 47 of the Constitution, while mandating the duty of the State to raise standards of living and to improve the public health; and the Bihar prohibition law has been enacted with the said objective.

The Court referred to the directions given by the bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. in Sudhir Kumar Yadav v. State of Bihar, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No(s). 2482/2022, wherein the Court has directed the State Government to collect number of prosecutions under the Act and cases pending in different Courts including the High Court under the Excise Act. Further, it was directed that a mechanism should be put in place to deal with the situation, however, nothing has been done by the State, as there have been an increase in the number of cases in Courts after the law was passed, thereby putting additional workload on the already overburdened judiciary.

The Court, after examination of the reports submitted in several bail applications, observed that the main factors for the non-implementation of the Act in its true spirit, leading to these adverse consequences are due to the following reasons:

  • Smuggling of liquor from outside the State and neighbouring country like Nepal.

  • Use of stolen vehicles using fake registration numbers, engine number and chassis number, and non-adherence to the direction of prescribing measures or procedure by the State and its officials to obtain details of the seized vehicles which had entered the State.

  • Engaging minors to transport liquor, as hiring minors has become a new way of smuggling liquor in dry State, as they will face trial in juvenile court and will be released within months

  • Lacuna left by the investigating officer in conduct of search, seizure and investigation, as while investigating into the offences committed under the Excise Act, they deliberately don’t submit chargesheet against the smugglers or the gang operators rather submit charge sheet against poor labourers who are engaged in loading and unloading of liquors and sometimes the passerby who don’t even have connection with the offence that led to this legal ban. Further, not only the police officials, excise officials, but also officers of the State Tax department and the transpor department love liquor ban, as for them it means big money.

  • Failure of the State to take strict disciplinary action against the erring officers, particularly, Police Officers, Excise Officers, Commercial Tax Officers and the District Transport Officers of the concerned District under whose nose illicit trade of liquor is being carried out.

  • Sharp rise in consumption of drug and persons addicted to it.

The Court held that the lives of citizens of the State is risked by the failure of the State machinery in effectively carrying on the provision of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 and to safeguard the health, life and liberty of the people at large in public interest and requested the Chief Justice to take cognizance of the issue on its judicial side for instituting public interest litigation for the cause of larger public interest.

[Niraj Singh v. State of Bihar, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14308 of 2022, decided on 12.10.2022]


Advocates who appeared in this case :

Counsel for the Petitioner: Advocate Upendra Kumar Chaubey;

Counsel for the Respondent: State Counsel Vikash Kumar;

Additional Public Prosecutor Ajit Kumar.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *