SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Shiva Poly Tubes Pvt. Ltd. and Ors – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr – Respondent
CR. MISC. 737/2018



Advocates:
['Alok Kumar Agrawal', '', 'Priya Gupta', 'VIPUL KANORIA', 'SRI ANIL PRASAD SINGH', '', 'Shiva Shankar Sharma', 'Arun Kumar Sinha', 'Deo Nandan Pd Singh']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.737 of 2018

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2017 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE

District- Jehanabad

======================================================

1.

Shiva Poly Tubes Pvt. Ltd. a company registered under the Companies Act,

1956 now under 2013 Act having its place of business at 307, Narayan

Plaza, Exhibition Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, Town and District Patna

through its Managing Director Sri Ramesh Chandra Gupta S/o Late Sriram

Gupta, R/o Flat No.502, Santosha Apartment, Bandar Bagicha, P.S.-

Kotwali, Town and District- Patna.

2.

Ramesh Chandra Gupta S/o Late Sriram Gupta R/o Flat no.502, Santosha

Apartment, Bandar Bagicha, P.S.- Kotwali, Town and District- Patna.

3.

Binay Kumar Singh S/o Late Ram Kripal Singh, R/o 69, Patliputra Colony,

P.S.- Patliputra Colony, Town and District- Patna.

4.

Vijay Kumar Sinha S/o Late Ram Naresh Lal, R/o Mohalla- South Mandiri,

P.S.- Buddha Colony, Town and District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar

2.

Md. Afsar Imam S/o Late Md. Akhtar Hussain, R/o at C/o Hindustan Pipe

Bhandar, P.G. Road, Opposite Idgah, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Opposite Party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Alok Kumar Agrawal, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP

For the O.P. No. 2

:

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 20-09-2021

Heard Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Senior Advocate

for the petitioners and Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned

Senior Advocate for the Opposite Party No. 2. The State is

represented by Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, learned APP.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.737 of 2018 dt.20-09-2021

2/20

2. This application has been filed for quashing the

order dated 06.11.2017 passed in Complaint Case No.

496 of 2017 by which cognizance has been taken under

Sections 195, 196, 211, 120B, 420, 504 and 499 of the

Indian Penal Code and Sections 63/65 and 68 of the Copy

Right Act, 1957.

3. The complainant/opposite party no. 2 claims to

be the Managing Director of Freedom Plast Private Limited

having its unit at B-38, Industrial Area, Hajipur (Vaishali).

It has been alleged by him that he has, since 2004,

started manufacturing plastic pipes. However, before that,

he had taken the dealership of Shiva Poly Tubes Pvt. Ltd.

on the request of petitioner no. 3. He had thereby agreed

to sell the products of Shiva Poly Tubes Pvt. Ltd. through

his firm viz. M/s. Hindustan Pipe Bhandar at Jehanabad.

After becoming the manufacturer of the plastic pipes

himself, he had returned the dealership to the petitioner

no. 1/Shiva Poly Tubes Pvt. Ltd. Per force, the accused

persons had to appoint another dealer viz. M/s. Janta Tube

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.737 of 2018 dt.20-09-2021

3/20

Well for the district of Jehanabad for the sale of their

product. It is in this context that it has been alleged that

the petitioners, with the help of the local dealer, filed a

case against the complainant and his brother with the

allegation of attempting to pass off his goods as the goods

of the petitioners. It was falsely claimed by the petitioner

no. 3 in the FIR viz. Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 344 of

2005, that on information from Janta Tube Well that

duplicate pipes under the brand name of the Shiva Poly

Tubes was being used for laying down Government

tubewell. On this information, petitioners no. 3 and 4 are

said to have visited the place/site and found that fake

pipes under the name of Shiva PVC pipes were being used.

It has also been alleged that it was wrongly claimed by the

petitioners no. 3 and 4 that those fake pipes were

sold/provided by the Hindustan Pipe Bhandar, a

proprietorship firm owned by complainant/op

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top