IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15345 of 2010 BINOD KUMAR @ BINOD LAL SRIVASTAVA, SON OF SRI MOTILAL SRIVASTAVA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GURARU POLICE STATION GURARU, DISTRICT- GAYA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 09.06.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act as it is alleged that 200 litres of kerosene oil seized by the Block Supply Officer belong to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes such assertion of the Block Supply Officer on the ground that the Block Supply Officer had concluded that the seized kerosene oil belong to the petitioner on the basis of the statement of the members of the public present at the place of seizure but names of those present at the place of seizure has not been indicated in the First Information Report. In the circumstances, according to the counsel for the petitioner there is nothing substantial to connect the petitioner with the seized kerosene oil. I see substance in the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner. Let the petitioner surrender in the court below in connection with Guraru P.S.Case No. 8 of 2010 and apply for regular bail in the light of the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. and if the court below also agrees with the findings of this Court, petitioner be admitted to the privilege of bail. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)