IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14520 of 2010 HARI NARAYAN PRASAD, S/o Late Paltu Sah, R/o Village – Dumari, P.S. – Station – Jogapatti, District – West Champaran Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 11.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is owner of the vehicle which was carrying allegedly illicit liquor is denied for having any concern as his vehicle was plying on contract. One of the co-accused said fled away from the vehicle is allowed bail by this Court on the ground that his involvement was based on confession made by a co-accused. Petitioner is not entitled for same privilege as being the owner of the vehicle. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, presently, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. However, if he had no concern with the seized liquor his prayer for bail may be considered in regular side after his surrender without being prejudice by this order. Praful ( Mandhata Singh , J.)