ASHOK RAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the petition filed by the petitioner -accused No. 2 under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail and to direct the respondent -police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 370(3), 370A, 294, 109 of IPC and Sec. 35 of Excise Act registered in the respondent -police station Crime No. 611/2013.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner -accused No. 2 and also the learned HCGP for the respondent -State.

(3.) I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and order passed by the Lower Court on the bail application and I have also perused the other materials produced along with the petition. Looking to the material on record the prosecution materials goes to show that the present petitioner is the owner of the building. So far as the grant of licence to run the Bar and Restaurant, there is mention that present petitioner is having the said document, but the complaint allegations that the said activities are going on in violation of the Government Order issued in GO No. HO 357 SSJ 2010 dated 06.07.2013. Hence, the materials prima facie goes to show that the activities in the Bar and Restaurant are against the said Government Order. Hence, the materials, prima facie, goes to show that though the competent authority issued license for running Bar and Restaurant but question is what are the activities going on in the said Bar and Restaurant and for which purpose license is granted. For this, statement of witnesses, prima facie, goes to show that they have been used and exploited to dance in the presence of the customers coming to the said Bar and Restaurant, the materials are also goes to show that mikes were fixed and lights were also put in the said room leaving the space in the middle for dance. These are the materials collected during the investigation by the raiding party.