The Supreme Court of India will examine police powers under Bihar prohibition law, including home entry for breath tests, while hearing the state’s appeal against a Patna High Court ruling that breath analysis alone is not conclusive proof.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court said it will consider whether police may enter a person’s home and administer a breath analyser test under Bihar’s prohibition law, while broadening the scope of an ongoing appeal to examine the constitutional validity of key provisions.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh was hearing the State of Bihar’s challenge to a Patna High Court judgment that held a “breath analyser test alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of alcohol consumption”.
During the hearing, the Court expanded the issues before it and chose to probe the constitutional validity of Sections 37 and 75 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The Bench indicated it would consider whether these provisions allow intrusive practices such as entering private residences to detect alcohol.
Significantly, the Court took up this question suo motu, despite neither the State nor the respondent having directly disputed the validity of those sections.
Factual Background:
The matter arose from the Patna High Court’s quashing of an FIR against a person alleged to have consumed alcohol in violation of the State’s prohibition law. The record shows the individual was at his home in Kishanganj and subjected to a breath analyser test, which registered an alcohol concentration of 41 mg per 100 ml. An FIR under Section 37 of the 2016 Act was filed solely on the basis of that result.
Challenging the FIR, the accused argued that no confirmatory medical examinations, such as blood or urine tests, were performed and that reliance on a breath analyser reading alone was inadequate.
The High Court accepted this argument and ruled that a breath analyser report, by itself, cannot conclusively establish alcohol consumption.
Before the Supreme Court, the State maintained the High Court misread the statutory scheme of the 2016 Act, contending that Section 75 expressly allows breath analysis and medical examination and that such reports are admissible as evidence. The State further argued that the breath analyser reading indicating the presence of alcohol justified registering the FIR.
The Supreme Court has listed the matter for further hearing on April 24.
Case Title: The State of Bihar v. Narendra Kumar Ram
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE