IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40884 of 2010 AMOD BAITHA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 15-11-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The F.I.R. has been lodged by a Government Official, namely, Block Supply Officer, who has alleged that even after giving opportunity to show cause, the allegations could not be explained and he has found that several articles lifted for distribution to the beneficiaries under various schemes, were not actually distributed. The articles include kerosene oil. On behalf of petitioner it has been submitted that allegations are false and unless specific details of the Order and as to which of the Order has been violated, no case under section 7 of the E.C. Act is made out.There may be some substance in the latter submission relating to E.C.Act. It is the duty of the police and the court concerned to find out actually as to what offences have been committed on the basis of allegations made against the petitioner which are said to have been proved during investigation. 2 In the facts of the case, this court is not persuaded to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer is rejected. This order shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner if he surrenders and seeks regular bail and takes all the grounds available to him under law during regular bail. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)