The Patna High Court has ruled that a breath analyzer test alone cannot serve as conclusive evidence of alcohol consumption, setting aside an FIR filed under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
A bench led by Justice Bibek Chaudhuri made this determination while hearing a case against Narendra Kumar Ram, who was arrested in May 2024 after an excise team claimed he was intoxicated based on a breath test result of 41 mg/100 ml.
The court pointed out that authorities failed to consider a Supreme Court ruling in Bachubhai Hassanalli Karyani v. State of Maharashtra, which stated that indicators like the smell of alcohol, unsteady gait, and slurred speech are insufficient to prove intoxication conclusively.
The petitioner contended that no confirmatory blood or urine tests were conducted, despite legal requirements for such tests. He further argued that his breathalyzer result might have been influenced by prescribed homeopathic medicine containing an alcohol-based solvent. Additionally, he claimed that the case violated his constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 21.
The State, however, maintained that the breath analyzer result was accurate and that there were no procedural lapses in the arrest.
After reviewing the case, the court found the prosecution’s reliance on the breath test insufficient and quashed the FIR, granting relief to the petitioner.