IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42521 of 2010 1. PASHUPATI KUMAR SINHA SON OF LATE MAHESHWAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SATHE, P.S. KOSHI, DISTRICT NAWADAH. 2. MUKARAM HUSSAIN SON OF SHRI RAHAT HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAGIA DEORAJ, P.S. RAM NAGAR, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 02 26.03.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Excise Case No.04 of 2010 registered for the offence under Section 47A of the Bihar Excise Act. It is alleged against them as also the incharge of the distillery and licensee of the ware house that they utilized the transit pass dated 1.2.2010 for carriage of additional 12,000 liters of rectified spirit from Riga Sugar Factory, Distillery Division to M/s Spicy Beverage, Pvt. Ltd., Biharsharif. On the same pass the first consignment was taken to the same destination on 1.2.2010 and the other on 2.2.2010. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that aforesaid allegation is wholly incorrect as the same transit pass can never be used for carriage of another consignment. In this connection, it is pointed out that at both the ends i.e. distillery 2 division from where the consignment is taken and the ware house where the consignment is reached the excise officials are present round the clock and any delivery or receipt cannot be made without their permission. In this connection, it is further pointed out that after receipt of the consignment the transit pass is verified and endorsement made over the same, which can be verified from the issue and the receipt register maintained at the distillery division and the ware house respectively. In this connection, learned counsel also pointed out that petitioner nos.1 and 2 are the escorter and owner of the tanker in which the rectified spirit is said to have been carried from distillery division to the ware house and the other two accused of the instant case i.e. the incharge of the distillery division and the owner of the ware house have already been admitted to the privilege of bail in the event of arrest in the instant case by this Court under orders dated 12.10.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.23153 of 2010 and 27533 of 2010, copy whereof is contained in Annexure-10 to this application and this Court should also fall in line with those orders and admit these petitioners to the privilege of bail in the event of arrest. True it is that the incharge of the distillery 3 division and owner of the ware house have been admitted to the privilege of bail in the event of arrest in the instant case by another Bench of this Court under orders dated 12.10.2010, Annexure-10 but close perusal whereof does not indicate that this Court noticed the allegations that the same transit pass dated 1.2.2010 was used for carriage of rectified spirit twice i.e. on 1.2.2010 and 2.2.2010. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the State, I am of the view that the allegations made out in the prosecution report can be verified by asking the prosecuting officer to produce the issue register from the distillery division and the receipt register from the ware house whereunder the consignment was dispatched and received and to verify from the two register whether the same transit permit was used for carriage of the spirit from distillery division to the ware house twice i.e. on 1.2.2010 and 2.2.2010. Let petitioners, named above, appear in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Excise Case No.04 of 2010 along with a copy of this order, whereafter the court below should call for the two registers from the prosecuting officer and verify whether the same 4 transit pass was used twice for carriage of rectified spirit. Until such verification is made, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners. It is, however made clear that if after verification it is found that allegations in the prosecution report are not substantiated from the two registers petitioners be admitted to the privilege of bail, otherwise appropriate orders remanding them to jail custody be passed and report submitted to this Court. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. Let this order be communicated to the court below through fax on payment of usual charges by the petitioners. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)