High CourtsSingle Bench

Yash vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 March 2014 · Citation: (2014) FAJ 528

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rekha Mittal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 — Section 26, 27 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468
CASE NUMBER
Cri Misc. M 9814 of 2014
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 279 words

Rekha Mittal, J.—The petitioner prays for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No. 14 dated 17.2.2014 for offence under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 26/27 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, registered at Police Station, Kulgarhi, District Ferozepur. Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has nothing to do with the manufacture of alleged duplicate desi ghee and Tomato sauce which are stated to be sold under the brand names of Neeraj Premium Quality and Yash, respectively. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery has already been effected from Harsh Bansal and Paras, who have already been released on bail by the court below. The last submission made by counsel is that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and co-operate throughout.

2.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

3.

Perusal of the allegations set out against the petitioner would reveal that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and his co-accused that they are carrying on a business of manufacturing adulterated desi ghee and tomato sauce and selling these products in the brand names of Neeraj Premium Quality and Yash. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner or his co-accused obtained any permission from any authority for doing business of manufacturing these products which are meant for human consumption. Manufacturing of adulterated food articles meant for human consumption, amounts to playing with the life of the people. There is no extraordinary circumstance in favour of the petitioner which entitle him to pre-arrest bail, a concession to be allowed by the Court.

Dismissed.