CRM-M-26888 v. SURYA PARTAP SINGH

The abovementioned FIR has come into being on a complaint has come into being on a complaint ‘complainant’ moved by ‘Prabhjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ moved by ‘Prabhjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as moved by ‘Prabhjot Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as In the abovementioned complaint, which has formed the basis of FIR, only. In the abovementioned complaint, which has formed the basis of FIR, In the abovementioned complaint, which has formed the basis of FIR, In the abovementioned complaint, which has formed the basis of FIR, that ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ has been carrying on business of it has been alleged that ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ has been carrying on business of that ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ has been carrying on business of it has been spare parts since the year 1961, and manufacturing cycle/rickshaw and its spare parts since the year 1961, and spare parts since the year 1961, and manufacturing cy various registrations including sales tax, VAT, GST and trademark that various registrations including sales tax, VAT, GST and trademark various registrations including sales tax, VAT, GST and trademark various registrations including sales tax, VAT, GST and trademark registrations stand in favour of the firm of the complainant registrations stand in favour . According to of the firm of the complainant. According to complainant, the accused, namely ‘Khokhan Hawildar’ complainant, (the petitioner the accused, namely ‘Khokhan Hawildar’ (the petitioner herein), ‘Papiya Howladar’ , ‘Papiya Howladar’, ‘Parthajit Dasgupta’ and ‘Sandip Ghosh’ , ‘Parthajit Dasgupta’ and ‘Sandip Ghosh’ were associated with the companies, namely ‘M/s G.K. Rickshaw associated with ’ and companies, namely ‘M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd.’ and ‘G.K.S. Rickshaw Pvt. Ltd.’, and that they dishonestly ‘G.K.S. Rickshaw Pvt. Ltd. started using the trade , and that they dishonestly started using the trade name/trademark “G.K.” and fabricated name/trademark “G.K.” and GST and fabricated documents, brochures and GST related records in the name of firm of complainant, i.e. ‘M/s G.K. Traders’. related records in the name of firm of complainant, i.e. ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ related records in the name of firm of complainant, i.e. ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ related records in the name of firm of complainant, i.e. ‘M/s G.K. Traders’ The complainant has further alleged that the above The complainant named accused even further alleged that the above-named accused even favour on applied for registration of complainant’s trademark in their own favour on applied for registration of complainant’s trademark in their own applied for registration of complainant’s trademark in their own the strength of false documents and therefore, caused wrongful loss to the the strength of false documents and therefore, caused wrongful loss to the the strength of false documents and therefore, caused wrongful loss to the the strength of false documents and therefore, caused wrongful loss to the complainant, which culminated into wrongful gain to the accused. complainant, which culminated into wrongful gain to the accused. complainant, which culminated into wrongful gain to the accused.

3. has also In the abovementioned complaint, the complainant has also In the abovementioned complaint, the complainant claimed that on that on 27.02.2025, few of the acc , few of the accused visited the office complainant at Ludhiana and threatened him complainant at Ludhiana and threatened to withdraw pending cases filed him to withdraw pending cases filed by the complainant against the accused, and pressurize by the complainant against the accused the complainant to and pressurized the complainant to stop opposing the abovementioned illegal business activities of the accused. stop opposing the abovementioned illegal business activities of the accused. stop opposing the abovementioned illegal business activities of the accused. stop opposing the abovementioned illegal business activities of the accused. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.15 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26888 26888-2026 (O&M) 8587 3 The complainant that on the abovementioned occasion, he e complainant has also stated that on the abovementioned occasion, he that on the abovementioned occasion, he was manhandled manhandled also, by the accused.

4. alleged that with In addition to above, the complainant has alleged that with In addition to above, the complainant regard to abovementioned dispute, even a civil suit has been filed by the regard to abovementioned dispute, even a civil suit has been filed by the regard to abovementioned dispute, even a civil suit has been filed by the regard to abovementioned dispute, even a civil suit has been filed by the petitioner, but despite a restrained order petitioner, but despite , passed by the Court in the restrained order, passed by the Court in the abovementioned civil suit in favour of complainant, the accused continued to abovementioned civil suit in favour of complainant, the accused continued to abovementioned civil suit in favour of complainant, the accused continued to abovementioned civil suit in favour of complainant, the accused continued to sell e-rickshaw s and spare parts through dealers and social media platforms. rickshaws and spare parts through dealers and social media platforms. s and spare parts through dealers and social media platforms.

5. It It It the case of the case of the case of the prosecution the prosecution the prosecution that pursuant that pursuant that pursuant abovementioned complaint, formal FIR of this case abovementioned lodged and the formal FIR of this case has been lodged and the investigation taken up. investigation taken up.

7. Heard. It has been contended by learned ounsel for the by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that contents of the abovementioned petitioner that that main the abovementioned FIR go to show that main allegations in the FIR, against the petitioner allegations in the FIR are with regard to use of trade against the petitioner, are with regard to use of trade name/trademark, incorporation, function of certain companies, filing o name/trademark, incorporation, function of certain companies name/trademark, incorporation, function of certain companies filing of sale of e- documents before various authorities and commercial sale of e documents before various authorities and commercial documents before various authorities and commercial rickshaws/spare parts in the brand name ‘G.K.’, despite pendency of civil rickshaws/spare parts in the brand name ‘G.K.’, despite pendency of civil rickshaws/spare parts in the brand name ‘G.K.’, despite pendency of civil rickshaws/spare parts in the brand name ‘G.K.’, despite pendency of civil litigation. As contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the litigation. As contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the litigation. As contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the litigation. As contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the gravamen of the dispute, as narrated in the gravamen FIR itself, is with regard to , as narrated in the FIR itself, is with regard to , and that the present petitioner is , and that the present petitioner business dealings and corporate entities, and that the present petitioner business dealings , against alleged to be one of the Directors of ‘M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd.’, against alleged to be one of the Directors of ‘M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd.’ alleged to be one of the Directors of ‘M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd.’ suit has been filed by the complainant. whom the civil suit has been filed by the complainant. whom the civil GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.15 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26888 26888-2026 (O&M) 8587 4

8. rned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, before According to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, before rned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, before registration of instant FIR, a commercial suit registration of bearing No.CS/14/2025, titled commercial suit, bearing No.CS/14/2025, titled as ‘M/s G.K. Traders & Anr. V/s M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd. & Ors.’, has as ‘M/s G.K. Traders & Anr. V/s M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd. & Ors.’, has as ‘M/s G.K. Traders & Anr. V/s M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd. & Ors.’, has as ‘M/s G.K. Traders & Anr. V/s M/s G.K. Rickshaw Ltd. & Ors.’, has already been already been already been already been instituted instituted instituted instituted the commercial Court, Ludhiana, which the commercial Court, Ludhiana, whic the commercial Court, Ludhiana, whic the commercial Court, Ludhiana, whic demonstrates that the dispute between the complainant and the present demonstrates that the dispute between the complainant and the present demonstrates that the dispute between the complainant and the present demonstrates that the dispute between the complainant and the present petitioner is primarily a dispute of civil nature. petitioner is primarily a dispute of civil nature. petitioner is primarily a dispute of civil nature.

9. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further in the backdrop of abovementioned dispute, which is contended that in the backdrop of abovementioned dispute, which is in the backdrop of abovementioned dispute, which is contended that essentially a dispute of civil nature entially a dispute of civil nature, by a story with regard to by concocting a story with regard to , a false FIR has been lodged, whereas intimidation and forging of documents, a false FIR has been lodged, whereas , a false FIR has been lodged, whereas intimidation the core of dispute between the parties can be adjudicated upon by a civil the core of dispute between the parties can be adjudicated the core of dispute between the parties can be adjudicated Court only. According to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Court only. once the Senior Counsel for the petitioner, once the lodged, the petitioner approached the Court of FIR in question has been lodged, the petitioner approached the Court of lodged, the petitioner approached the Court of FIR in question arrest learned Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana for the concession of pre-arrest learned Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana for the concession of pre learned Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana for the concession of pre bail, but by virtue of order dated 18.04.2026 bail, but by virtue of arrest bail order dated 18.04.2026, passed in a pre-arrest bail , the learned Additional Sessions application bearing No.BA/3113/2026, the learned Additional Sessions , the learned Additional Sessions application bearing No.BA/3113/2026 Judge Ludhiana dismissed the abovementioned application. Judge Ludhiana As per learned dismissed the abovementioned application. As per learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the abovementioned order, passed by the Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the abovementioned order, passed by the Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the abovementioned order, passed by the Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the abovementioned order, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana, is illegal, arbitrary and Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana, is illegal, arbitrary and Judge Ludhiana, is illegal, arbitrary and outcome of improper appreciation of fact as well as untenable, as the same is outcome of improper appreciation of fact as well as outcome of improper appreciation of fact as well as untenable the law.

10. learned Senior Counsel for the It has also been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the It has also been contended by petitioner that on 09.05.2026, when the petitioner had gone petitioner to ‘Netaji that on 09.05.2026, when the petitioner had gone to ‘Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport, Kolkata’, in the wake Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport, Kolkata’ Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport, Kolkata’ GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.15 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26888 26888-2026 (O&M) 8587 5 ‘Look-Out Circular , he was apprehended by police officials on the Out Circular’ (LOC), he was apprehended by police officials on the , he was apprehended by police officials on the Airport and thereafter, produced before the Court of learned Additional Airport and thereafter, produced before the Court of learned Additional Airport and thereafter, produced before the Court of learned Additional Airport and thereafter, produced before the Court of learned Additional , North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. As , North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. Chief Judicial Magistrate, per learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Chief per learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Chief per learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Chief per learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, before whom the petitioner was produced, Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, before whom the petitioner was produced Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, before whom the petitioner was produced Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, before whom the petitioner was produced extended the benefit of interim/transit bail to the extended the benefit of interim/transit ioner on 09.05.2026 bail to the petitioner on 09.05.2026 itself, with a direction to appear before the learned trial Court at Ludhiana by itself, with a direction to appear before the learned trial Court at Ludhiana by itself, with a direction to appear before the learned trial Court at Ludhiana by itself, with a direction to appear before the learned trial Court at Ludhiana by

12.05.2026 According to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, in the 026. According to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, in the According to learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, in the arrest bail has been filed. meantime, the present petition for pre-arrest bail has been filed. meantime, the present petition for pre

11. ned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further ned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further of present petition, the petitioner contended that once at the time of filing of present petition, the petitioner contended that once at the time of filing contended that once at the time of filing arrest bail is maintainable. In support was not in custody, the petition for pre-arrest bail is maintainable. In support arrest bail is maintainable. In support was not in custody, the petition for pre of his abovementioned arguments, the learned Se of his abovementioned arguments, nior Counsel for the the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme petitioner has referred to the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme petitioner has referred to the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme petitioner has referred to the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Priya Indoria V/s State of Karnataka & Ors.’ Court of India in the case of ‘Priya Indoria V/s State of Karnataka & Ors.’ Priya Indoria V/s State of Karnataka & Ors.’ Court of India in the case of ‘ 2024(2) RCR (Criminal) 112 RCR (Criminal) 112.

12. The learned State Counsel, as well as learned Senior Counsel as well as learned Senior Counsel for the complainant, have controverted the abovementioned arguments. for the complainant The controverted the abovementioned arguments. The thrust of arguments of arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the complainant has been learned Senior Counsel for the complainant has been upon the plea that once in view of Look upon the plea Out Circular, the petitioner was that once in view of Look-Out Circular, the petitioner was , a direction was taken into custody, and at the time of interim/transit bail, a direction was taken into custody, and at the time of interim/transit bail taken into custody, and at the time of interim/transit bail given to the petitioner to appear before the learned trial Court by 12.05.2026, given to the petitioner to appear before the learned trial Court by 12.05.2026, given to the petitioner to appear before the learned trial Court by 12.05.2026, given to the petitioner to appear before the learned trial Court by 12.05.2026, arrest bail is not maintainable. According to the present petition for pre-arrest bail is not maintainable. According to arrest bail is not maintainable. According to the present petition for pre learned Senior Counsel for the complainant learned Senior Counsel f , once the petitioner has been or the complainant, once the petitioner has been GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.15 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26888 26888-2026 (O&M) 8587 6 he is presumed to be in custody arrested and released on interim/transit bail, he is presumed to be in custody arrested and released on interim/transit bail, arrested and released on interim/transit bail, principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble and therefore, in view of principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble and therefore, in view of mar S. Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Dhanraj Aswani V/s Amar S. Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘ Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘