ORDER : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate. Perused the records. 2. The allegations made against the petitioner is that he is the licence holder to sell the foreign liquor, indian liquor, beer and wine at premises No.147, Ward No.18, situated in Hosapete. It is the case of the prosecution that on 14.01.2017, in the afternoon at 2.00 p.m., the Police Inspector, Town Police Station, Hosapete, had a credible information that some persons are selling the liquor in Harijankeri of Eshwara Nagar, Hosapete. Immediately, the said Police Inspector, along with panch witnesses and his staff, raided the said place. They caught hold of a person by name, M.Nagaraj, son of Jambaiah, who was selling the Haywards Cheers Whisky tetra packs, and when he was personally examined, the police found Rs.180/cash and a Karbon mobile with him. It is alleged that when he was interrogated by the police, he disclosed that he had purchased 121 packets of Haywards Cheers Whisky tetra packs worth Rs.3,211/- from the petitioner herein. Therefore, it appears that the police have incorporated the name of the present petitioner also as a person responsible for the selling of the said liquor to the public much against the licence conditions. 3. At this stage, except the voluntary statement of accused No.1, it appears that there is no other material running against this petitioner. Of course, police have to investigate the matter and examine the truthfulness or otherwise of the statement of accused No.1. 4. It is contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that the petitioner is not surrendering so as to cooperate with the investigation and complete the same. Perhaps under an apprehension that if he goes to the police, he may be arrested forthwith, the petitioner might not have gone to the police station. 5. The petitioner is a licence holder and there are no previous bad antecedents alleged against the petitioner. The only allegation made against him is that he has violated the licence conditions, which has to be enquired into by the police during the course of investigation, and further, whether there was any collusion between accused no.1 and 2 is also to be examined by the police during the course of investigation. The only allegation made against him is that he has violated the licence conditions, which has to be enquired into by the police during the course of investigation, and further, whether there was any collusion between accused no.1 and 2 is also to be examined by the police during the course of investigation. Under these circumstances, if the petitioner gives an assurance to the Court that he would assist the Investigation Officer in order to complete the investigation as early as possible, in my opinion, there is no reason to reject the anticipatory bail at this stage. 6. Having considered that the offences alleged are not punishable with serious punishment, and in view of the above said facts and circumstances of the case, the following order is passed: Order The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 7/2017 of Hospete Town Police Station, for the offences under Sections 32 and 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, on the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. (ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the case for the purpose of investigation, interrogation etc. (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in 15 days on any Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. till the filing of the charge-sheet or for a period of two months whichever is earlier. (v) The petitioner shall appear before the Court on all future hearing dates.