IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7281 of 2009 CRIME NO.19 OF 2006 OF HARBOUR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 3 & 4 --------------------------------------------- 1. GAYETRI MISHRA, W/O.ASOK MISHRA, FLAT T1 3RD FLOOR, 666, SAHID HEMANTA KUMAR BOSE, SARANI, L.P.62/32,KOLKATA 700 004. 2. SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, S/O.ASOK MISHRA, OF -DO- -DO- BY ADV. SMT.SOUMINI JAMES RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 7281 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.19 of 2006 of Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 63 of the Copy Right Act and Sections 103 and 104 of the Trade Marks Act. 3. The prosecution case is that the petitioners imported duplicate razor blades from a Singapore based company as if the blades were original “supermax” blades manufactured by the de facto complainant. 4. The case of the petitioners is that the husband of the first petitioner and the father of the second petitioner, namely, Ashok B.A. NO. 7281 OF 2009 :: 2 :: Mishra, is the Kartha of a Hindu Undivided Family and that they are doing business in Kolkata. Only the Kartha is doing the business in question. The business concern is called “M/s.Gunjan Impex”. In 2005, M/s.Gunjan Impex made an order for import of shaving blades under the brand name “Panda” from M/s.Swastik International PTE. Ltd., Singapore. During the first week of September 2005, the consignment reached in Cochin Port. The consignor sent a letter dated 5.8.2005 intimating the consignee that there was a mistake in the consignment and the articles which were not ordered by the consignee were consigned. M/s.Gunjan Impex intimated their bank and the Department of Customs about the mistaken identity of the goods and a request was made to re-export the goods. It is stated that in the meanwhile, the police arrested the Kartha of the family and on 6.2.2006 he was released on bail. 5. The petitioners apprehend arrest and, therefore, they have filed this application for anticipatory bail. 6. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 8.1.2010, the following order was passed: B.A. NO. 7281 OF 2009 :: 3 :: “It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners are not residing in the address shown in the Bail Application. The petitioners shall furnish their correct address with proof that they are residing in that address. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in the course of investigation, the investigating agency could not locate the place of the registered office of the partnership firm, of which, the petitioners are partners. The petitioners shall also furnish the correct address of the registered office of the partnership firm and sufficient proof for the same. Post on 12/01/2010.” 7. On behalf of the petitioners, a statement was filed and Annexures A10 to A14 were produced. In Annexure A10, the address of Ashok Mishra is shown as “4, Abhoy Mitra Street, Kolkata – 700 005”. In Annexure A10 itself, it is stated that Ashok Mishra was a tenant. It is stated that the tenanted building was vacated later. It is stated that now the petitioners are staying in the flat B.A. NO. 7281 OF 2009 :: 4 :: belonging to the second petitioner. Annexures A11 and A12 are produced to show the present address of the petitioners. The address is shown as Flat -T1 3rd floor, 666, Sahid Hemanta Kumar Bose, Sarani”. Annexure A13 is produced to show that on 1.10.2006, Kartha of the Hindu Undivided Family informed the Sales Tax Officer that he had closed down the business with effect from 1.10.2006. Annexure A14 is produced to show that the registration under the West Bengal VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act in the name of M/s.Gunjan Impex HUF was cancelled with effect from 1.3.2007. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: B.A. NO. 7281 OF 2009 :: 5 :: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/