The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that it will examine whether the police can enter a person’s home and subject them to a breath analyser test under Bihar’s prohibition law [The State of Bihar v. Narendra Kumar Ram].

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh was hearing an appeal filed by the State of Bihar against a Patna High Court judgment which held that a breath analyser test alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of alcohol consumption.

During the hearing, the Bench expanded the scope of the appeal and said that it would examine the constitutional validity of Sections 37 and 75 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, including whether they allow intrusive alcohol testing of individuals.

Notably, the Court decided to examine the validity of these provisions on its own, even though neither the State nor the respondent had challenged them.

The case has been pending before the Court since April 15, 2025, when notice was issued.

The matter arises from a Patna High Court ruling which quashed a first information report (FIR) registered against an individual accused of consuming alcohol in violation of Bihar’s prohibition law.

The case involved an individual who was found at his residence in Kishanganj and subjected to a breath analyser test, which showed an alcohol concentration of 41 mg/100 ml. He was arrested and an FIR was registered under Section 37 of the 2016 Act.

He challenged the FIR before the High Court, arguing that the prosecution relied solely on the breath analyser test without conducting confirmatory medical tests such as blood or urine analysis.

The High Court had held that a breath analyser report, by itself, cannot conclusively establish alcohol consumption.

This ruling was challenged by the State before the Supreme Court.

In its plea, the State argued that the High Court failed to consider the statutory scheme under the 2016 Act. It was pointed out that Section 75 of the Act allows authorities to conduct breath analysis and medical tests, and that such reports are admissible as evidence.

According to the State, the breath analyser test showing the presence of alcohol was sufficient to justify registration of the FIR.

The case will be heard next on April 24.