PAWAN YADAV v. THE STATE OF BIHAR
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 419, 420, 467
- Copyrights Act, 1957 ss. 63, 65
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 100
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER Mr.Kumar Ravish, Adv. Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi, APP 2 23-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 89 of 2022/ G.R. No. 878 of 2022 dated 10.04.2022 registered for the offence under Sections 419, 420 and 467of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 63 and 65 of the Copyrights Act,
1957. The petitioner is alleged to have indulged in dealing with the duplicate products of Bajaj Consumer Care and Marico Limited and they are being manufactured and on the search of, huge quantity of Nihar naturals coconut Hair Oil and Bajaj Alamond Drops. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27160 of 2023(2) dt.23-05-2023 this case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. and seizure list that 300 pieces of Bajaj Almond Drops of 200 ml and 60 pieces of 100 ml ready stock along with other branding materials have been recovered form the house of the petitioner. He further submits that there is non-compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. and the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet in this case against the petitioner. He further submits that no case attracting the provisions of copyright Act is made out against the petitioner.
Operative part
The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 16.03.2023. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 89 of 2022 with the following conditions:- (1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27160 of 2023(2) dt.23-05-2023 (2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. brajesh/- U T (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 419, 420, 467; Copyrights Act, 1957 — ss. 63, 65; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 100.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.