Breathe Analyser report not conclusive proof of liquor consumption: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court on Wednesday held that a breath analyser report is not conclusive proof that a person has consumed liquor [Manju Devi vs State of Bihar]..Single-judge Justice Bibek Chaudhuri said that the blood sample and urine test is the correct method to ascertain whether or not a person has consumed liquor."Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State and on perusal of the entire material on record, thus Court likes to record that breathe analyser report is not a conclusive proof of consuming liquor by a person," the Court held. .The finding came on a plea filed by the wife of a clerk of a sub-divisional office in Kishanpur, who was dismissed from service by an order passed on January 11, 2020. He was initially arrested for reporting to work under influence of alcohol on February 5, 2018. He was booked for violating provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excuse Act, 2016. In his defence, the clerk, who died during the pendency of his plea, contended that on the relevant day, he was suffering from cold and cough and thus has consumed cough syrup containing certain amount of alcohol. The judge noted that after arresting the petitioner's husband, his blood and urine samples were not taken to examine the percentage of liquor in his body at the relevant time. "In the instant case, there is no allegation that at the time of arrest, the gait of the original petitioner (clerk) was unsteady, he was speaking incoherently or that his pupils were dilated. The Supreme Court has held that mere smelling of alcohol is not enough to hold that a person consumed alcohol. Thus, I have no other alternative but to hold that the disciplinary authority failed to consider the judgments of the Supreme Court and based its order of punishment on the breathe analyser report, which cannot be said to be a conclusive report of consumption of alcohol," Justice Chaudhuri observed in the order passed on June 19.