The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior on Tuesday set aside three anticipatory bail orders granted to accused persons in a high-profile fake spices case involving the alleged misuse of the “Bhatia Masale” brand. Sitting in a packed courtroom, Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta made it clear that courts cannot lightly extend pre-arrest bail when charges include serious forgery offences carrying punishment up to life imprisonment.
Background
The case began with a complaint by Rajkumar Bhatia, who claimed that fake packets of “Bhatia Masale” were being sold in the market, harming both consumers and his brand’s goodwill. Police investigations led to the recovery of counterfeit spice packets and printing material allegedly used to copy the original packaging.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Quashes Trial Court Stay in ₹2.33 Crore Hotel Dispute, Cites Judicial Consistency and Misuse of CPC Section 10
Initially, the accused were booked under cheating and copyright law provisions. Over time, as the charge sheet was examined, more serious sections relating to forgery and criminal conspiracy were added. Despite this, the Sessions Court in Vijaypur granted anticipatory bail to the accused in September 2024, relying mainly on the Supreme Court’s Arnesh Kumar ruling, which discourages unnecessary arrests in offences punishable up to seven years.
Court’s Observations
Hearing the complainant’s challenge, the High Court noted that the Sessions Court overlooked a crucial fact - several enhanced charges, including forgery of valuable security, attract punishment beyond seven years and even life imprisonment.
Read also:- Kerala High Court refuses bail to Palakkad man accused of bus harassment, says grave allegations block extraordinary relief under new
“The court below proceeded on the assumption that all offences were punishable up to seven years, which is factually incorrect,” the bench observed, pointing out that the JMFC had already found prima facie material for serious forgery offences.
Justice Gupta also referred to Supreme Court precedents on cancellation of bail, clarifying that while bail is not to be cancelled casually, it cannot stand if granted by ignoring the gravity of charges. The judge remarked that applying Arnesh Kumar mechanically, without examining the nature of enhanced offences, amounted to a legal error.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Says 'Technical Breaks' Can't Deny Maternity Leave, Orders Maharashtra Medical College to Pay Assistant Professor Dues
Decision
Allowing the complainant’s application, the High Court quashed the anticipatory bail orders dated 24, 27 and 30 September 2024. The accused have now been directed to approach the trial court for regular bail, which must be decided independently on merits, without being influenced by the High Court’s observations.
Case Title: Rajkumar Bhatia vs The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Case Type: Miscellaneous Criminal Case (Anticipatory Bail Cancellation)
Case No.: MCRC No. 43273 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 17 December 2025
