Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Munna Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16021 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2025 Thana- AMAS District- Gaya ====================================================== Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Munna Gupta Son of Bishwanath Prasad Gupta @ Bishwanath Kumar Gupta @ Shivnath Kumar Gupta Resident Of MohallaNaya Bazar, Sherghati, Ps- Sherghati, Dist- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rajnish Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Amas P.S. Case No.11 of 2025, F.I.R dated 11.01.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 63 and 65 of the Copy Right Act, 1957.

3. According to prosecution case, on 11.01.2025, the informant, authorized by his company, visited Hemzapur Highway Road to verify reports of sale of duplicate company parts. He sought assistance from Amas Police Station, and a police team accompanied him. During the inspection, shops belonging to Zaya Ahmad, Ranjeet Singh, and Munna Gupta

2/4 were found allegedly selling duplicate parts of Ashok Leyland Limited. The parts were seized in the presence of the police, following which the FIR was lodged.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of allegation of manufacturing duplicate parts of Ashok Leyland while there is no evidence or any report of expert to show that the parts which is said to have been seized, is duplicate parts of the company in question. It is the case of the petitioner that the allegation of the shop of the petitioner not being registered with GST gets falsified by Annexure-2, which goes to show that the petitioner is a registered shopkeeper vide GST No.10AEFPG7724Q1ZD. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances the petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of allegation of manufacturing duplicate parts of Ashok Leyland while there is no evidence or any report of expert to show that the parts which is said to have been seized, is duplicate parts of the company in question and the petitioner is a

3/4 registered shopkeeper and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. . Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 the learned A.C.J.M. Sherghati, Gaya (Bihar) in connection with Amas P.S. Case No.

4/4 failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) sharun/- U T