IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5442 of 2010 RAMBALI MAHTO, S/o Late Baue Lal Mahto, R/o Village- Pandaul Bazar, P.S.-Pandual, District- Madhubani. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 4. 12-07-2010 Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under section 47-A of the Excise Act. It is alleged that 375 litres of country made illicit liquor has been recovered from the house of the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that prosecution report as contained in Annexure-1 suggests that accused fled away from the place of seizure whereas it is mentioned in the seizure memo that seizure list was given to accused, but there is no signature or L.T.I. of the petitioner on the seizure list nor of any one of his family members. Moreover, it is submitted that seizure has actually not been made from the house of the petitioner because seizure list no way connects the petitioner with the seizure. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and statement to that effect has been made in paragraph 12 of the bail application. In view of the contradiction between the prosecution report and the seizure memo, which creates doubts about the prosecution case, let petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest and/or surrender within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the - 2 - satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with G.O. NO. 116 of 2009 corresponding to T.R. NO. 2390/2009. One of the bailors will be his own relatives. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani will be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner, if he is found involved in any similar case. Sujit (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)