IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3885 of 2011 RAMA NAND SAO, SON OF BAIJU SAO, RESIDENT OF SAHBEGPUR, POLICE STATION-MOKAMA, DISTRICT-PATNA. ….Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 15.03.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 420, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 63, 65 of the Copyright Act. It is alleged that from the house of the petitioner the packing machine, wrapper of Ghari detergent and other articles were recovered. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the shop where recovery has been made is the joint family house as the grocery shop is being run by the brother of the petitioner, but maliciously the petitioner has been implicated. It is further stated that the alleged seized articles have not been sent for the chemical test as it appears from the FIR, hence it cannot be said with certainty that the offences are actually made out. The aforesaid contention of the petitioner is good ground for regular bail, let regular bail application of the petitioner be considered by learned court below considering the fact that the shop in question was run by 2 the brother of the petitioner and the accusation has been made on the basis of suspicion without verification of the genuineness of the alleged seized materials. Let the learned court below consider the regular bail application of the petitioner, if he surrenders within a period of four weeks, this application is, accordingly, disposed off. PN ( Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.)