IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12211 of 2008 RAJ KUMAR PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 14.05.2010 The present application has been filed against the observations made in Para 5 and 6 of the order dated 11.12.2007 passed in A.B.P. No. 767 of 2007 by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, whereby in a case under Excise Act, being G.O. Case No. 9 of 2007, one of the accused Mahabir Yadav was granted bail. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not an accused in the said matter but Mahavir Yadav took a plea that the land from which the alleged liquor was seized was leased out by Mahavir Yadav to this petitioner. It is further submitted that the report was called for from the Excise Department about the lease to the petitioner and it has come that no such lease has been taken by the petitioner but the submission of the Mahavir Yadav has been recorded in para 5 and 6 of the impugned order against the petitioner. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the observation made in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned order may not be used against the petitioner in any proceeding. With these observations, the application stands disposed of. Shageer (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)