JAIL IF MACHINE SAYS SO

JAIL IF MACHINE SAYS SO

26-JUNE-ENG 3

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

PATNA-----------------------Since the implementation of the liquor ban law in Bihar, action has been taken against thousands of people. From streets to neighborhoods, police and Excise Department teams have been arresting individuals after testing them with breath analyzer machines. However, a crucial observation by the Patna High Court has now raised serious questions about this entire process.

The High Court has clearly stated that a person cannot be convicted of alcohol consumption solely based on a breath analyzer report. According to the court, this machine serves only as a means for preliminary screening, whereas scientific and concrete evidence is required to confirm alcohol consumption.

This case dates back to November 24, 2016. It was alleged that a jawan named Manoj Thakur was creating a ruckus in an intoxicated state near the BMP-6 camp. An Excise Department team arrived at the scene and conducted a breath analyzer test, which reportedly confirmed alcohol consumption. Based on this report, an FIR was registered at the Muzaffarpur Excise Police Station, and the jawan was arrested. Subsequently, the lower court took cognizance of the matter and initiated further proceedings. Manoj Thakur is reported to be a resident of Goshala Road in Begusarai district. As a government employee, he also faced the looming threat of disciplinary action under service rules.

Rules for government employees under the liquor ban law are even stricter. Consequently, the breath analyzer report had created a situation where he could face departmental action or even dismissal from service. Challenging this, Manoj Thakur approached the Patna High Court, contesting both the FIR and the lower court's decision to take cognizance of the case.

During the hearing, the Patna High Court questioned how a person could be deemed guilty of alcohol consumption based solely on a machine's report. The court reiterated that the breath analyzer is merely a tool for preliminary screening. According to the court, scientific evidence is essential to prove guilt, necessitating medical tests such as a blood test. Taking action solely based on a machine's report, without concrete evidence, cannot be considered appropriate.

In a significant ruling, the High Court quashed both the FIR registered at the Muzaffarpur Excise Police Station and the cognizance taken by the lower court. This decision is deemed crucial for the investigative procedures conducted under the liquor ban law. In the future, investigative agencies may need to rely on scientific tests rather than depending solely on breath analyzers in such cases.

Legal experts believe this verdict could have a major impact on the implementation of the liquor ban law. If an individual is accused of consuming alcohol, investigative agencies might now be required to obtain blood test results or other scientific evidence. Consequently, questions are arising as to whether the entire process of arrest and investigation under the liquor ban law will undergo changes in the near future.

For now, this observation by the Patna High Court clearly indicates that an individual's liberty cannot be compromised, nor can criminal action be initiated against them, based merely on a machine's report. Along with enforcing the law, the presence of scientific and concrete evidence is equally essential.