Patna High Court Dismisses FIR, Says Breath Analyzer Report Is Not Strong Evidence of Drinking Alcohol.

The Patna High Court emphasized that a breath analyzer report is not definitive proof of alcohol consumption. The Court dismissed a First Information Report (FIR) against the petitioner, who faced charges under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. It referenced a previous Supreme Court decision in the case of Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v. State of Maharashtra, which stated that signs like the smell of alcohol, unsteady movements, slurred speech, or dilated pupils do not conclusively indicate that someone has consumed alcohol. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri remarked that after considering the arguments from both the petitioner and the State, it was clear that the authorities overlooked the Supreme Court’s guidance. The FIR was based solely on the breath analyzer report, which is not conclusive evidence of alcohol consumption.

The Court pointed out that the authorities did not take this important aspect into account when they relied only on the breath analyzer results to file the FIR. Unhappy with the FIR, the petitioner went to the Patna High Court to have the case dismissed. He claimed that the prosecution’s case depended entirely on the breath analyzer test, which he argued could not be considered conclusive proof of alcohol use. After reviewing the evidence and arguments, the High Court decided that the breath analyzer report alone was not enough to prosecute the petitioner. Following the Supreme Court’s comments, the Court annulled the FIR and provided relief to the petitioner by approving his writ petition.

Cause Title: Narendra Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Shivesh Sinha, Piyush Parasar, Meghali Diksha, Amrit Kumar, and Rabi Bhushan Prasad
Respondents: Additional Advocate General Sarvesh Kumar Singh