IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47519 of 2008 MD.JUBER Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 3.12.2008 Heard Mr. Bimal Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Indiwar Kumari, learned A.P.P. The contention is that the petitioner’s participation could not be in any manner and the petitioner could not stand accused in the case. The fact is that the petitioner had the knowledge as he had the custody of the seized property which had been handed over to him by the accused for storage. I have considered the provision of Section 8 of the Essential Commodities Act and, in my view, it could be a case of abetement and in that view, even if the main accused has been granted anticipatory bail, I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail at this stage. The petition is dismissed. However, as soon as the petitioner completes six months in imprisonment in the case, the court below itself shall release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bond to his own satisfaction. Let this order be sent through fax if the cost thereof is deposited by the petitioner. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha,J )