Bihar Excise Act, 1915:
ss. 2(17A) and 53(a) [as inserted by Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016] – Offence of Consumption of liquor in public place – Cognizance taken – Application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings – Dismissal of – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: The vehicle in which the accused were travelling would come within definition of ‘Public Place’ as defined in s. 2(17A) – However, whether the charge that consumption of liquor took place within the State of Bihar, needs to be decided by the Magistrate – The accused shall be at liberty to file application for discharge before the Magistrate – Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 – s. 37(b).
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1.1 Definition of ‘place’ as contained in Section 2(17) of Bihar Excise Act, 1915, is the inclusive definition which specifically includes “vehicle”. When word ‘place’ includes vehicle the words ‘public place’ have to be interpreted in the same light. What Section 2(17A) defines is that a ‘public place’ means any place to which public have access, whether as a matter of right or not and includes all places visited by general public and also includes any open space. The key words are ‘any place to which public have access’, which phrase is further qualified by phrase “whether as a matter of right or not”. [Para 21] [820-A-C]
1.2 Under the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 prior to Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 there was no definition of ‘public place’. In the notification dated 29.07.1978 issued by the State of Bihar in exercise of power under Section 19(4) word ‘public place’ was defined. The same definition of public place was contained in subsequent notifications dated 27.03.1979 and 19.09.1980. The State Government in the above notifications defined ‘public place’ as “any place intended for use by or accessible to the public and shall include any public conveyance”. It is clear that private conveyance was not included in the notification and State did not prohibit possession and consumption of any intoxicant in a ‘private conveyance’ under the aforesaid notifications. But the above notifications are no more relevant after the Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 which Amendment was brought in the statute to implement the Bihar Excise Policy, 2015. The Bihar Excise Policy, 2015 was framed by the State to implement prohibition effectively. [Paras 23, 24] [820-F-G; 821-B-D]
1.3 The private vehicle of the appellants was intercepted when it was on the public road. When private vehicle is passing through a public road it cannot be accepted that public have no access. It is true that public may not have access to private vehicle as a matter of right but definitely public have opportunity to approach the private vehicle while it is on the public road. Hence, it cannot be said that vehicle in which appellants were travelling was not covered by definition of ‘public place’ as defined in Section 2(17A) of Bihar Excise Act, 1915 as inserted by the Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016. [Para 22] [820-E]
1.4 The ommission of public conveyance in the definition of Section 2(17A) brought by the Bihar Excise (Amendment)Act, 2016 also indicates that the difference between public conveyance and private conveyance was done away in the statutory amendment. Therefore, it cannot be said that private conveyance will be excluded from the definition of ‘public place’ as contained in Section 2(17A). [Para 25] [821-D-E]
Manikandan v. State of Kerala (1999) 2 KLT 592 – referred to.
Black Law’s Dictionary – referred to.
2. The word ‘consumes’ is a verb transitive. When the word ‘consumes’ is followed by liquor, the action denoted by verb passes over from the doer to object i.e. liquor to constitute the offences within the meaning of Section 53(a). The action of consumption of liquor has to happen within the State of Bihar. A person who consumes liquor in a different State cannot be fastened with a penalty under Section 53(a) unless there is some evidence to prove that consumption of liquor by the accused has taken place in the State of Bihar. As per Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 even if a person consumes liquor outside the State of Bihar and enter into the territory of Bihar and is found drunk or is in a state of drunkenness, he can be charged with offences under Section 37(b). But no offence as now contemplated by Section 37(b) was provided for in Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016. Thus, the consumption of liquor has to be in the State of Bihar. However, whether the charge that consumption of liquor has taken place within the State of Bihar is made out in the facts of the present case are questions which need to be decided by the Magistrate after looking into the materials brought on record by means of the chargesheet. The ends of justice will be served in providing that appellants shall be at liberty to file an application to discharge before the Magistrate who after considering the materials on record shall decide the said application of discharge in accordance with law. [Paras 27, 28] [822-F; 823-A-E]
Confederation of India Alcoholic Beverage Companies & Anr. v. Manoj Kumar & Ors. 2016 (4) PLJR 369 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.