Bangalore District Court
Venkatesh.N vs Dilip Kumar on 8 April, 2024
1
KABC030545802018 Digitally signed
R by R MAHESHA
MAHESHA Date: 2024.04.08
17:51:42 +0530
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 8 th day of April 2024
Present : R.Mahesha,
B.A.L., LLB.,
IX Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT U/SEC.355 OF CR.P.C.
1.C.C.No. 20199/2018
2.Date of Offence 25.01.2017
3.Complainant State by Byatarayanapura
Police Station.
4.Accused 1.Dileep Kumar,
S/o Dharmachand,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at No.1601, 4th Cross,
8th Main,
Vijayanagara,
Bengaluru-40.
2.Rajesh Chowdari,
S/o Jayadev Chowdari,
2
Aged about 34 years,
R/at N0.12/1,
4th Cross, Kasturiba Nagara,
Mysore Road, Bengaluru- 26
5.Offences complained of u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of
Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC.
6.Plea Accused No.1 & 2 pleaded not
guilty.
7.Final Order Accused No.1 & 2 are
acquitted.
8.Date of Order 08/04/2024
JUDGMENT
The Sub-Inspector of Police of Byatarayanapura Police Station has filed this charge against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC.
02. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 25/01/2017 at about 5.00 pm within the limits of 3 Byatarayanapura Police Station, situated at Maruthi Soap Factory, No.88, Karethimmanahalli Pipeline, Mysore Road, Bengaluru, Police Inspector got information that, the accused persons manufacturing of spurious/ counterfeit soaps of M/s. Hindustan Unilever Limited for Surf Excel without obtaining any licence or permission from the CW.1 & 2, the authorized officer of the said company and misutilized the same and cheated to the company and public. In this regard, CW.1 lodged first information statement and based on the same FIR came to be registered in Cr.No.46/2017 for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC. Thereafter, CW.1 along with CW.2 to 9 and with panchas rushed to the spot and conducted raid and seized the counterfeit products by drawing panchanama. Thereafter, PI completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC. 4
03. The accused persons are on bail. On receipt of charge sheet, this court took the cognizance of the alleged offences and furnished copy of the prosecution papers to the accused persons. this court has framed charge against accused No.1 & 2 for the offences punishableu/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC, for which accused No.1 & 2 pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
04. The prosecution in order to prove its case, has not examined any of the witnesses, in spite of repeated issuance of NBW against CW.1 to 9 the concerned agency failed to execute the same to the said witnesses and brought them before this court, hence prayer of learned Sr.APP is rejected and dropped CW.1 to 9 and closed the side of the prosecution evidence, as there is no incriminating circumstances against the accused. Hence, the accused statement U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with and posted for judgment.
5
05. I have heard the arguments on both sides.
06. The prosecution in order to prove its case, has not examined any of the witnesses, in spite of repeated issuance of NBW against CW.1 to 9 the concerned agency failed to execute the same to the said witnesses and brought them before this court, hence prayer of learned Sr.APP is rejected and dropped CW.1 to 9 and closed the side of the prosecution evidence, as there is no incriminating circumstances against the accused. Hence, the accused statement U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with and posted for judgment.
07. In order to prove the guilt of the offences as alleged against the accused persons by the prosecution, the prosecution has not at all examined any one of the witnesses. CW.1 to CW.9 are dropped out 18/03/2024. Hence, prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the offences as alleged against the accused No. 1 & 2 6 beyond reasonable doubt. Thereby accused No.1 & 2 are entitled for the benefit of doubt. Hence, I proceed to pass following;
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 & 2 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused No.1 & 2 shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stands cancelled automatically. (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 6th day of April 2024).
(R.Mahesha) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
7ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
-NIL-
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
-NIL-
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
-NIL-
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED, DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE:
-NIL-
IX ACMM, Bengaluru.8
08/04/2025 Judgment Judgment pronounced in the Open Court (Vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 & 2 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(1), 51(B), 63 of Copyright Act & Sec.420 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused No.1 & 2 shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stands cancelled automatically.
IX ACMM, Bengaluru.