VIKAS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.264 dtd. 12/6/2021 at Police Station City Jind, District Jind, Haryana under Ss. 103, 104 of Trade Marks Act, 1999, Ss. 51/63/65 of Copy Rights Act, 1957 and Ss. 272, 273, 406, 420, 467, 468, 472, 473, 475, 476, 486 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The FIR was lodged pursuant to receipt of secret information by the police to the effect that some persons were selling spurious "Vanaspati Ghee' of Raag Company (Adani Wilmar) at Indra Market, Jind. Pursuant to receipt of said information, the police party went to the nominated place where a TATA ACE vehicle bearing registration No.HR-45B-5888 having 100 tins of "Raag Vanaspati Ghee' loaded was found. The information was sent to the local Food Safety Officer (FSO). The truck in question alongwith its driver were brought to the police station. The FSO Smt. Harsh Kumari, drew samples from the tins of "ghee'. It is further the case of prosecution that in the meantime, a complaint was received through e-mail from Mr. Asheesh Gupta, Senior Manager (Legal), Adani Wilmar for registration of FIR for offences under Ss. 103, 104 of Trade Marks Act, 1999, Ss. 51/63/65 of Copy Rights Act, 1957 and Ss. 272, 273, 406, 420, 467, 468, 472, 473, 475, 486 read with Sec. 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and pursuant thereto FIR No.264 dtd. 12/6/2021 at Police Station City Jind, District Jind, Haryana under Ss. 103, 104 of Trade Marks Act, 1999, Ss. 51/63/65 of Copy Rights Act, 1957 and Ss. 272, 273, 406, 420, 467, 468, 472, 473, 475, 476, 486 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code came to be lodged.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and was never ever arrested at the spot and cannot be connected with the alleged spurious "ghee'. It has further been submitted that upon chemical analysis of the samples drawn from the tins of "ghee', the same was found to be in conformity with the prescribed standard. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is sought to be nominated on the basis of some disclosure statement made by driver of the vehicle in question, which would hardly carry any evidentiary value.