IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15437 of 2009 VIJAY SINGH, son of Sri Jhulan Singh, resident of village-Mathiapar, Hardia Bedauli, P.S.-Paliganj, District-Patna----------Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 5.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Illegal wine was recovered from the petitioner’s orchard. For the same submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner has no concern with the seized wine rather he was working elsewhere. There could be no watch if some one is preparing wine in his orchard. He further submits that seizure list mentions also the case number and that falsifies the allegation about seizure. But it is only mechanism. First step is to get known to the crime then there should be F.I.R. but in this case seizure is made first and F.I.R. was lodged later and to interlink each other case number is mentioned in the seizure list, that cannot be doubted. If petitioner has no concern with the seized wine, that can be raised in the lower court. I find it not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Prayer of the petitioner is rejected. However, petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below , i.e., A.C.J.M., Danapur, in connection with Paliganj P.S. case no.62 of 2009 within one month and pray for regular bail which shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the rejection order of this Court. Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J )