A bench of Justice Purnendu Singh said that the "draconian provisions" of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, have "become handy for the police, who are in tandem with the smugglers" and innovative ideas have evolved to hoodwink law enforcing agencies and deliver the contraband.

The Justice Singh-led Bench said that while Article 47 of the Constitution mandates raising standards of living and improving public health at large, the 2016 law, enacted with the said objective, for several reasons, finds itself on the wrong side of history.

"Not only the police official, or the excise official, but also officers of the state Tax Department and the Transport Department love liquor ban, for them it means big money."

The Patna High Court said that the number of cases registered against the kingpins/syndicate operators is fewer in comparison to the magnitude of the cases registered against the poor who consume liquor. “

"The life of a majority of the poor section of the state who are facing the wrath of the Act are daily wagers who are only earning members of their family. The Investigating Officer deliberately does not substantiate the allegations made in the prosecution case by any legal document and such lacunae are left and the same allows the mafia scot free in want of evidence by not conducting search, seizure and investigation in accordance with the law," it added.

The above observations were made as the Patna High Court dealt with a plea filed by an Inspector challenging his demotion after "illicit foreign liquor" was recovered in a raid by the Excise Department conducted in a warehouse located 500 metres from the police station.

The petitioner contended that within the period of four months, he had registered 74 cases relating to excise matters, arrested 130 accused persons, recovered a total amount of 2,541.86 litres of illicit liquor, and effectively implemented prohibition within his jurisdiction.

In its judgment, the Patna High Court after perusal of the charge memo, said that it was framed on the direction of Bihar’s Director General of Police, who had directed the SSP Patna that in case of recovery of illicit liquor from any police station's territorial jurisdiction, the Station House Officer (SHO) concerned would be held guilty and strict action will be taken against him.

"In the present case, the DGP with a pre-determined mind, had observed that strict disciplinary action is required to be taken against the petitioner, which resulted in the passing of a penalty order against the petitioner by the disciplinary authority, who with pre-conceived minds, took a decision to impose penalty in compliance of the letter of the DGP," it added.

Quashing the suspension as well as the penalty order, the high court said that the authorities had pre-determined to impose a penalty on the petitioner and proceeded to hold a quasi-judicial inquiry giving the post-decisional opportunity of hearing which does not subserve the rule of natural justice and is contrary to the principle of fair play.

"The authority who embarks upon a post-decisional hearing will naturally proceed with a closed mind and there is hardly any chance of getting a proper consideration of the representation at such a post-decisional opportunity,” it said.

However, it clarified that in light of the recorded evidence, if the disciplinary authority finds that the petitioner should be subjected to disciplinary action, in that circumstance, the petitioner is required to be put under suspension to proceed afresh in light of the law laid down by the apex court.