Shiv Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19102 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-640 Year-2020 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Shiv Kumar Sah, Son Of Jagannath Sah R/O Village- Jagiriya, P.S.- Saraiya (Jaintpur O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 103/ 104 of the Trade Mark Act and Sections 63, 64 and 65 of the Copy Right Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant, who is Chief Investigator of Dabar India Limited, alleges that in Jagiriya Bazar of Jaitpur, four Pudin Hara was being manufactured about which information was given to the police on 24.09.2020. It is alleged that when police team reached the place of occurrence, one accused fled, who was recognized by the local people as petitioner. Further, in presence of the independent witnesses, the house of the petitioner was searched in which numerous forged Dabar Products

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19102 of 2022(2) dt.27-09-2022 2/2 were found, on which no level was found.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the place of occurrence, nor was present in his house and in his absence the raid was conducted. It is next submitted that petitioner is having a shop of betel.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that person like petitioner is bane for the society as he plays with life of innocent people as people when required they used Ayurvedic Product and if such fake product is manufactured and the same is consumed that will become lethal for life, as such, the person like petitioner should not be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T