Patna High Court
Most. Malti Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 12 August, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Alok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5246 of 2025 ====================================================== Most. Malti Devi Wife of Late Anil Kumar Singh, resident of Village - Yarpur Rajputana, Police Station - Gardanibagh, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Prohibition Excise and Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Additional Commissioner, Prohibition Excise and Registration Department (Headquarter), Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Excise Director, Excise Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Excise Commissioner, Prohibition, Excise and Registration Department, Patna. 5. The District Magistrate-cum-District Collector, Patna. 6. The Superintendent of Police, Patna. 7. The Officer Incharge, Shastri Nagar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Satyendra Kumar Srivastava, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dhirendra Kumar, AC to GP 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY C.A.V. JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY) Date : 12-08-2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the Secretary, Prohibition Excise and Registration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna (respondent no.1) in Excise Revision Case No. 17 of 2024 rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner against the order dated 19.06.2023 passed by Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna in Excise Appeal Case No. 56 of 2023 affirming the order dated Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025 2/9 14.01.2023
passed by the District Collector, Patna in Excise
Confiscation Case No. 3765 of 2022-23.
2. By filing the present writ petition, the
petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-
“(i) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs,
direction/directions or order/orders especially in
the nature of Certiorari the order dated
02.09.2024 passed in Excise Revision Case
No.17/14 passed by Additional Commissioner of
Excise (Headquarter) Prohibition Excise, Patna,
Bihar (Respondent No.2) arised in with Excise
Appeal Case No.56/2023 passed order dated
13.06.2023 by Secretary of Commissioner Excise
Court, Patna which arising out specially the order
dated 14.01.2023 passed in Excise Confiscation
Case No.3765 of 2022-23 by the District
Collector, Patna in directing to operation for the
confiscation order whereby and whereunder the
property has been seized in connection with
Excise Case bearing Shastri Nagar P.S. Case
No.586/2022 against the premises in question of
the owner of the land as well as the shop of the
petitioner.
(ii) For the issuance of appropriate writ in the
nature of Certiorari especially quashing the order
dated 14.01.2023 passed by the Collector, Patna
(Respondent No.5) in Excise Confiscation Case
2.23. No.3765/2022; whereby and whereunder the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
3/9property of the petitioner was ordered to be
confiscated in connection with Shastrinagar P.S.
Case No. 586/2022 as being owner of the property
and it was her responsibility to ensure that her
premises an rental shop is not being used for any
unauthorized business.
(iii) For that the petitioner also further prays for
issuance of appropriate writ/writs for direction or
order/orders especially in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to release the shop
having been constructed upon the ancestral
property appertaining under the Boundary of
North- Baldeo Bhawan, South office of Nawal
Bihar, East- Akilpur Kothi, West- Mohit Narayan
Path. Such belong to covered of Nagar Nigam,
Patna accordingly pay the rent of Circle-249 the
father-in-law which under the Shastrinagar Police
Station, Patna in favour of the petitioner which
was confiscated by respondents in connection with
Shastrinagar P.S. Case No.586/2022 dated
09.09.2022 registered under sections
30(a)/32(ii)/36/42(ii) of Bihar Prohibition &
Excise (Amendment) Act 2022 as the petitioner is
a lawful owner of Rental Shop as tenant namely
Rabi Kumar was open the shop in rented building
of petitioner on rent as (New Star
Communication) had leased of rent in pursuant to
an agreement dated 01.03.2013 executed by the
Brother-in-law (Sunil Kumar Singh) in that the
property under possession of petition after divide
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
4/9the share from Brother-in-law (Bhaisur).
And
For any other relief/reliefs which the Hon’ble
Court may be grant in general interest, that may
be deemed appropriate and necessary in this
case.”
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that there
is alleged recovery of 23.59 liters of illicit liquor from the shop
run by one Rabi Kumar. On the basis of aforesaid fact, Shastri
Nagar P.S. Case No. 586 of 2022 was registered under Sections
30(a)/32(ii)/36/42(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2022.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the brother-in-law of the petitioner namely, Sunil Kumar
Singh entered into an agreement of rent with said Rabi Kumar
on 01.03.2013 (Annexure-P/2) with security cost of Rs. 55,000/-
per month rent and in light of the same said Rabi Kumar has
been carrying business in Shop No. 2 as “New Communication
Shop”. It has been submitted that vide letter no. 9041 dated
05.11.2022 the letter communicated by Senior Superintendent of
Police in regard to Shastrinagar P.S. Case No. 586 of 2022 dated
09.09.2022 the country made liquor had been recovered hence
the New Star Communication Shop had been sealed and
recommended for confiscation before District Collector, Patna.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
5/9
Notice (Annexure-P/3) was issued against owner of the property
Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh and his legal dependent by
memo no. 1530 dated 14.11.2022 for filing show cause. In
response to the said notice, petitioner appeared in the
confiscation case and submitted that her father-in-law died on
08.03.1993 and her husband died on 09.02.2019. It has been
submitted that shop in question was rented out to one Rabi
Kumar and the said premise where the shop in question is
situated has been misused. It has been submitted that petitioner
is living alone at Gardanibagh Rajputana, Patna which is 10
Kms. away from the shop in question and after death of her
husband the renter has been paying rent through brother-in-law
and she has no role at all in the alleged illegal activity. It has
been submitted that the premises of the petitioner was
confiscated and sealed in the light of the order dated 14.01.2023
passed by the District Collector, Patna (respondent no. 5) in
Confiscation Case No. 3765 of 2022-23. Against the aforesaid
order of confiscation, petitioner filed appeal bearing Excise
Appeal Case No. 56 of 2023 before the appellate authority i.e.
Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna and the appellate authority
without taking into consideration the defence of the petitioner
passed rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner. Being
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
6/9
aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, petitioner filed revision
before the Secretary, Prohibition, Excise and Registration
Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna vide Excsie Revision Case
No. 17 of 2024, which has been rejected by order dated
02.09.2024 without taking into account the materials available
on record. It has been submitted that petitioner being a lady and
the alleged shop was on the ancestral property of the petitioner
and the affair of the shop in question was managed by the
brother-in-law on the basis of the rent agreement and petitioner
was not in direct touch with the renter who has been
apprehended from the shop. There is nothing on record which
goes to show that petitioner is in any way connected with the
illegal activities under the Excise Act. The person who has been
apprehended from the shop is the renter and the said shop is on
the ancestral property of the petitioner. It is submitted that in all
the proceedings before the confiscating authority, appellate
authority and the revisional authority the reasonable defence of
the petitioner has not been taken into account. Hence, petitioner
has no other efficacious remedy rather to approach this Court by
filing the present writ petition.
6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents submitted that there is recovery of illicit liquor
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
7/9
from the shop situated in the premises of the petitioner and
petitioner being the owner of the property in question had the
responsibility to ensure her the shop in question is not being
misused for any unauthorized business. It has been submitted
that though there is an agreement for rent between Sunil Kumar
Singh, the brother-in-law of the petitioner and the tenant Rabi
Kumar, but the said property belongs to the petitioner. Learned
counsel submitted that in the explanation to the show cause the
petitioner has failed to produce any evidence which goes to
suggest that the shop was not used for storage of illicit liquor. In
this way, the orders have been passed by the confiscation
authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority on the
basis of material available on the record and therefore, no
interference is needed. In light of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, the order passed by the confiscating authority,
the appellate authority and the revisional authority have been
passed on basis of the material available on record and are
proper and justified and hence requires no interference.
7. Having gone through the material available on
record, it is crystal clear that there is alleged recovery of 23.59
liters of illicit liquor from the shop in question and one person
was apprehended. Petitioner being a lady was not directly
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
8/9
concerned with the affairs of the shop which was run by the
renter on the ancestral property of the petitioner in the light of
rent agreement between the brother-in-law of the petitioner and
the renter Rabi Kumar and the affairs of rent was being
managed by the brother-in-law but at the same time the
petitioner failed to monitor the activities of the shop from where
illicit liquor was recovered. However, having gone through the
materials available on record, for recovery of 23.59 liters of
illicit liquor from the shop in question, confiscation of the whole
property is disproportionate to the offence committed and
conscious of this Court does not allow confiscation of whole
property.
8. Having regard to the fact that petitioner is a
lady and she has no direct concern with the day to day affairs of
the shop in question which was let out on rent as per agreement
contained in Annexure-P/2, we are exercising extra-ordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. Moreover, while dealing with similar issue, as
is involved in the present writ petition, a Division Bench of this
Court by judgment dated 14.09.2023 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
17894 of 2022 (Sunita Sinha Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.)
directed for release of the godown forthwith in favour of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5246 of 2025 dt.12-08-2025
9/9
landlord. The present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid
judgment passed in the case of Sunita Sinha (supra).
8. Keeping in view the discussions made above,
the orders dated 14.01.2023 (Annexure-P/4), 19.06.2023
(Annexure-P/5) and 02.09.2024 (Annexure-P/6) passed by the
confiscation authority, appellate authority and the revisional
authority respectively are, hereby, quashed. The respondent
authorities are directed to release the shop/property in favour of
the petitioner forthwith.
10. The writ petition stands allowed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
mcverma/-
AFR/NAFR AFR CAV DATE 05.08.2025 Uploading Date 12.08.2025 Transmission Date NA