IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39787 of 2010 RAJ KAMAL Versus STATE OF BIHAR -- 2/ 31.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Huge quantity of wine is recovered from petitioner’s premises. In lower Court submission was that after the death of its licensee father of the petitioner. There was no manufacturing work in the factory meant for manufacturing of drug and alcoholic drug for which he was issued license by Drugs Controller and Excise Department. Here, it is submitted that license for both the department was sought to be renewed was pending but seizure was verified by the Magistrate under the direction of District Magistrate as was requested by Sessions Judge and lesser quantity of wine only was recovered than seized, while the key was with Bond of Excise Department may not be taken for excuse. Under the aforesaid discussed circumstances, prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail is rejected. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)