liquor in the state of West Bengal. It was submitted that nowhere in the FIR, the allegation is that the petitioner had handed over the liquor for being taken to his partners in the State of Bihar, which makes it clear that the business in the State of Bihar was being done by others and not the petitioner and at best, it can be said that the petitioner and other co-accused, who are resident of West Bengal used to provide liquor and is limited to handing over of the same in the State of West Bengal, which is absolutely legal and permissible. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Accordingly, learned counsel submitted that once no illegality with regard to conduct of the petitioner, even if it is taken at face value that what has been alleged in the FIR is correct, the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act would not apply as there is no legal basis to connect the recovered liquor to the petitioner. It was further submitted that the seized truck also did not belong to the petitioner.
