Patna High Court quashes FIR, rules breath analyser test not conclusive for alcohol consumption [Read Order]

Patna: The Patna High Court has delivered a significant judgment, clarifying that breath analyzer tests alone cannot serve as conclusive evidence of alcohol consumption. This ruling led to the quashing of an FIR filed under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

Patna High Court Rules Breath Analyzer Test Insufficient for Alcohol Detection

Justice Bibek Chaudhuri addressed a criminal writ petition challenging an FIR registered at the Excise Police Station, Kishanganj, emphasizing the necessity of a comprehensive medical examination in such cases.

The court examined a case where the petitioner, Narendra Kumar Ram, was arrested on May 2, 2024, after allegedly being found in an inebriated state at his temporary residence in Kishanganj. The court noted, “The entire prosecution case is based solely on the breath analyzer test, which cannot be conclusive proof of alcohol consumption.”

FIR Quashed: Court Stresses Need for Blood and Urine Tests in Alcohol Cases

Analyzing the medical aspects, the court observed that the petitioner had visited an Electro Homeopathy Institute in Patna on April 16, 2024, for stomach infection treatment, where he was prescribed liquid homeopathic medicines containing an alcohol-based solvent. The court acknowledged that this could have affected the breath analyzer reading.

Citing the Supreme Court’s precedent in Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v. State of Maharashtra (1971), the court reiterated: “Consumption of alcohol can only be ascertained by a blood and urine test of the person suspected to have consumed alcohol.”

In a critical observation, the court ruled that the authorities had failed to consider the Supreme Court’s directive and had wrongly relied solely on the breath analyzer report. It emphasized that no confirmatory blood or urine test was conducted, which is mandatory under the law.

In conclusion, while allowing the writ petition, the court remarked that the authorities had overlooked the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s directions. It further noted that the breath analyzer report, which cannot be deemed conclusive proof of alcohol consumption, was improperly relied upon for registering the FIR.

Mr. Shivesh Sinha, Mr. Piyush Parasar, Ms. Meghali Diksha, Mr. Amrit Kumar, and Mr. Rabi Bhushan Prasad appeared for the Petitioner, while Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13, represented the State.
 
Case Title: Narendra Kumar Ram vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.
 

[Read Order]