In a significant ruling, the Patna High Court observed that the confiscation and auction of a vehicle over the recovery of just 1 litre of country-made liquor was disproportionate and unjustifiable. The court emphasized that imposing such harsh penalties for minor violations contradicts the principles of justice and proportionality.
The judgment was delivered in the case Anita Devi vs. The State of Bihar & Ors (Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12055 of 2024), where the petitioner Anita Devi, a resident of Deoria, Uttar Pradesh, had challenged the auction of her vehicle following the seizure of a minimal amount of alcohol.
Background of the Case:
The case originated from an incident in Gopalganj, Bihar, where Anita Devi’s white Swift Dzire (Registration No. UP52AM2441) was seized after the recovery of 1 litre of country-made liquor from the vehicle. The incident led to the registration of an FIR under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 (FIR No. 565 of 2023), which enforces stringent rules on the possession and transportation of alcohol in Bihar.
Following the seizure, the authorities proceeded to auction the vehicle for ₹3,25,000 on November 13, 2023, to a third party, Anil Kumar Prasad. Anita Devi, through her counsel, Kumar Harshvardha, contended that the auction was illegal, arguing that she was not given proper notice or an opportunity to be heard. Additionally, she challenged the exorbitant fine imposed, which amounted to ₹1,01,927, as unjustified given the minor nature of the offence.
Court’s Observations:
The case was heard by a division bench consisting of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Alok Kumar Pandey. After reviewing the facts, the court ruled in favour of the petitioner, highlighting that the confiscation and auction were disproportionate to the offence of possessing a mere 1 litre of liquor.
Justice Alok Kumar Pandey, delivering the judgment, noted, “The recovery of only 1 litre of country-made liquor does not warrant such harsh penalties. The auction of the vehicle and the imposition of a fine amounting to ₹1,01,927 is grossly disproportionate and does not align with the nature of the offence.”
The court also drew upon principles of fairness and proportionality, stating that imposing severe fines for minor violations undermines the legal system’s integrity. The bench pointed out that Anita Devi was not a habitual offender and that the confiscation and auction proceedings were conducted without due process.
Court’s Decision:
In its ruling, the court quashed the order of the Excise Commissioner passed on March 19, 2024, in Excise Appeal Case No. 08 of 2024. While acknowledging that the auction had already taken place and a third party had purchased the vehicle, the court reduced the fine imposed on the petitioner from ₹1,01,927 to ₹10,000. The court further directed that the auction proceeds be released to the petitioner after deducting the reduced fine.
“The auction of the vehicle for such a minor violation is unjustifiable. The authorities must ensure that penalties are commensurate with the offence committed,” Justice Pandey remarked.
The court also ordered the Gopalganj administration to release the remaining auction amount of ₹3,25,000 to the petitioner within six weeks of her depositing the reduced fine.
