The Patna High Court has reaffirmed that a breath analyzer test cannot be treated as conclusive proof of alcohol consumption, while quashing an FIR against an individual booked under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri observed that authorities failed to consider the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v. State of Maharashtra, where it was held that the mere presence of alcohol odor, unsteady gait, or incoherent speech does not conclusively establish intoxication.
“Based on breath analyzer report, which cannot be said to be a conclusive proof of consumption of alcohol, FIR has been registered,” the Court stated, emphasizing that such tests alone are not sufficient evidence for prosecution.
The case pertained to Narendra Kumar Ram, who was arrested on May 2, 2024, after an excise team conducted a breath analyzer test at his temporary residence in Kishanganj, recording an alcohol concentration of 41 mg/100 ml. He was subsequently booked under Section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Ram moved the High Court, arguing that the prosecution’s case was solely based on the breath analyzer test and lacked confirmatory blood or urine tests, which are required under law. He further claimed that he had been prescribed homeopathic medicine containing alcohol, which may have influenced the test results.
The State, on the other hand, defended the FIR, asserting that the petitioner was found in an inebriated condition and the breath analyzer test confirmed alcohol consumption. The prosecution dismissed allegations of procedural violations or malice.
However, after reviewing the arguments, the High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the FIR.
Advocates Shivesh Sinha, Piyush Parasar, Meghali Diksha, Amrit Kumar, and Rabi Bhushan Prasad represented the petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Sarvesh Kumar Singh appeared for the State.
Case: Narendra Kumar Ram vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. – Available on LAWFYI.IO
