IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21878 of 2009 RAJENDRA PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 17.9.2009 Heard Counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Allegation is that 10 bags of Mahua were seized from the shop of the petitioner, as such he has committed offence under the Excise Act as well as Mahua Flower Rules, 2008. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Block Development Officer, Fatehpur at Gaya has no power to make search and seizure under the Excise Act. It has also been stated that the seizure has not been made in presence of the petitioner. Further it is stated that the seizure is said to have been made on 29.10.2008 and the First Information Report has been instituted on 28.3.2009. Considering these facts, prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of above named petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner surrender - 2 - before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, when they shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Excise Case No. 69/2009, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the code of Criminal Procedure. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar