Bangalore District Court
State By Shivajinagar Police Station vs By Rejecting The Prayer Of Sr.App on 15 September, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BANGALORE.
Dated this the 15th day of September 2015
Present : Sri.J.V.Vijayananda, B.Com., LL.B
IX Addl.C.M.M.Bangalore.
JUDGMENT U/S.355 OF Cr.P.C..
1.C.C. No 1333/2014
2.Date of Offence 17-9-2013
3.Complainant State by Shivajinagar Police Station
4.Accused 1. Syed Tabrez
S/o. Late Syed Apsar,
aged 26 years, No.3257/5,
Anthoniswamy Layout,
Lingarapuram, Bangalore.
2. Irfan Pasha
S/o. Munavar Pasha aged 21
years, No.23, 3rd Cross, 3rd Main,
Maruthi Layout, B.T.M. 1st Phase,
Bangalore-23.
5. Offences complained U/s. 52(A), 68(A) Copyright Act.
of
6.Plea Accused Nos.1 and 2 pleaded not
guilty.
7.Final Order Accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted
15-9-2015
C.C.No.1333/2014
REASONS
The sub inspector of police Shivajinagar Police Station,
Bangalore has filed this charge sheet against accused Nos.1
and 2 for the offences punishable under section 52(A) and
68(A) of Copyright Act.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on
17-9-2013 at 7-45 p.m., in Sangeeth Sagar Cassette Shop
situated at No.177, D.K.Street, Shivajinagar, within the limits
of Shivajinagar Police Station, the accused No.2 being the
owner and accused No.1 being the worker of the said shop
were found in possession and selling of pirated DVDs and
MP3s which did not contain the name and address of the
person who has made, the name and address of the owner of
the copyright, the year of its first publication without
obtaining any license or written consent from the copyright
holder and further were selling the same as if the said DVDs
and MP3s are being supplied by the copyright holder company
and thereby cheated the general public as well as the
copyright holder company and committed aforesaid offences.
3. The accused Nos.1 and 2 are on bail. On receipt of
charge sheet, this court took cognizance of the offence and
furnished the copies of the prosecution papers to the accused
persons. After hearing on charges, this court framed the
charge for the offences punishable U/s.68 (A) of Copyright Act
C.C.No.1333/2014
and section 420 of IPC and questioned the accused persons
regarding the charge made against them, they denied the
charge and claims to be tried.
4. The prosecution in order to prove its case got
examined only one witness as P.W.1 and got marked only one
document at Ex.P.1 and also marked only one material object
as per M.O.1. Since C.Ws.1 to 3 and 5 to 9 did not turn up
before this court, in the interest of speedy justice to the
accused, by rejecting the prayer of Sr.APP, this court dropped
the examination of said witnesses.
5. Thereafter, this court examined the accused Nos.1 and
2 as required U/s.313 of Cr.P.C., the accused persons denied
the incriminating evidence appeared against them and
submitted that they have no defence evidence.
6. I have heard the arguments on both sides.
7. The prosecution to prove guilt against accused Nos.1
and 2 has examined only one witness by name Arun.P the
executive of Super Cassette Industries as P.W.1. It appears,
inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the prosecution has
not examined other witnesses on record.
C.C.No.1333/2014
8. The testimony of P.W.1 Arun.P indicating that on
21-10-2013 the PSI of Shivajinagar Police Station has sent
pirated DVDs and MP3s to his shop and asked him to submit
his opinion pertaining to seized DVDs and MP3s. He verified
and found that the said DVDs and MP3s did not contain
sensor board certificate, maximum retail price, company inlay
card, name and address of the copyright holder. Accordingly,
he opinioned that the said DVDs and MP3s are pirated and
issued the certificate as per Ex.P.1. P.W.1 has identified 100
pirated DVDs and MP3s as M.O.1. Though P.W.1 was
subjected to cross examination, except eliciting some minor
contradiction nothing elicited from him to disbelieve his
testimony.
9. As stated above, inspite of giving sufficient
opportunities, the prosecution has not examined other
witnesses on record. In a case like this the offences has to be
proved in circumstantial evidence by way of proving the
seizure mahazar of DVDs and MP3s. Further the prosecution
has to prove that the seized DVDs and MP3s are pirated and
did not contain necessary particulars as required under
section 52(A) of the Copyright Act. Further the prosecution has
to prove that the Super Cassette Industries had copyright over
different language films of seized DVDs and MP3s. Further
the prosecution has to prove that the accused No.2 is the
C.C.No.1333/2014
owner of Sangeeth Sagar Cassette Shop and accused No.1 is
the worker in the said shop.
10. It appears in this case the prosecution to prove
seizure mahazar has not examined any witnesses. However
the prosecution has examined P.W.1, who deposed that the
seized DVDs and MP3s are pirated which did not contain
necessary particulars as required under section 52(A) of the
Copyright Act. Ex.P.1 is the report given by P.W.1 wherein the
report did not contain the names of the films of DVDs and
MP3s. In my opinion, the report at Ex.P.1 is wage and cannot
be relied upon. Moreover, P.W.1 is the representative of the
Super Cassette Industries who is always interest in favour of
his company. In my opinion, the investigation officer ought to
have obtained report from the independent expert who is not
related to Super Cassette Industries. Therefore, the report of
P.W.1 cannot be relied upon to hold that the seized DVDs and
MP3s did not contain necessary particulars as required under
section 52(A) of Copyright Act. Apart from this prosecution has
failed to prove that the seized DVDs and MP3s did not contain
necessary particulars as required under section 52(A) of
Copyright Act by examine independent expert.
11. Further the prosecution has not examined any
witnesses and has not got marked any documents to show
C.C.No.1333/2014
that the Super Cassette Industries had copyright over different
language films of seized DVDs and MP3s. Further the
prosecution has not examined any witnesses and has not
marked any documents to show that accused No.2 is the
owner of Sangeeth Sagar Cassette Shop and accused No.1 is
the worker in it. Therefore, having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case and the evidence available on record
I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed
to prove the guilt against accused Nos.1 and 2 beyond all
reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the accused Nos.1 and 2 are
entitled for benefit of doubt. In the result, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
This court did not found guilt of accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences U/s.68 (A) of Copyright Act and section 420 of IPC.
Consequently, acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused Nos.1 and 2 have been acquitted for the above referred offences.
Their bail bonds and surety bonds stand cancelled.
C.C.No.1333/2014 M.O.1 DVDs and MP3s are being worthless shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer and print out taken by her is verified and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 15th day of September 2015) (J.V.Vijayananda) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
P.W.1, Arun P. LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1, Report Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1; LIST OF MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION: M.O.1, DVDs; LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED, DOCUMENTS AND
MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE:
NIL IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.
C.C.No.1333/2014 C.C.No.1333/2014 Judgement pronounced in the open court vide separate sheet.
ORDER This court did not found guilt of accused for the offence U/s.68 (A) of Copyright Act and section 420 of IPC.
Consequently, acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused has been acquitted for the above referred offences.
His bail bond and surety bond stands cancelled.
M.O.1 CDs and DVDs are being worthless shall be destroyed after appeal period is over. M.O.2 cash of Rs.145/- is confiscated to Government after appeal period is over.
Office to remove M.O.2 cash of Rs.145/- from CRCD Deposit and to remit the same to the Government under proper head.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.