Delhi District Court
Fir No. 149/2011 Ps: Eow State vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page ... on 21 January, 2020
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE02, CENTRAL DISTRICT,
TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI
PRESIDIING OFFICER: SH. GAJENDER SINGH NAGAR
State v. Subhas Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors.
FIR No. 149/2011
PS : EOW
U/s 63 of CR Act & 103/104 of TM Act.
JUDGMENT
Case No. : 294491/2016
Date of Commission of Offence : 14.10.2011
Date of Institution : 08.08.2014
Name of the complainant : Mr. Ratan Pal Singh
Name & address of the accused : (1) Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit
S/o Sh. Som Dutt
R/o H. No. RZB81, Gali No. 5,
Rajnagar Part1, Palam Colony,
Delhi
(2) Mukesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Prem Kumar
R/o H. No. 258, Gali Prakash
FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 1 /7
Teliwara, Sadar Bazar, Delhi06
(3) Devender Kumar Jain
S/o Sh. Viejder Kumar Jain
R/o A62, Kailthwara, New
Usmanpur, Delhi
Offence complained of : U/s 63 of CR Act & 103/104 of TM
Act.
Plea of accused person : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Acquitted
Date of reserve for judgment : 21.01.2020
Date of announcing of judgment : 21.01.2020
************************************************************* BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE FACTS FOR DECISION:
1. This is the prosecution of accused persons namely Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit, Mukesh Kumar and Devender Kumar Jain pursuant to charge sheet filed by PS EOW (IPR) U/s 63 of Copyright Act & 103/104 of Trademark Act subsequent to the investigation carried out against them FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 2 /7 in FIR No. 149/2011.
2. As per the prosecution, a complaint was received from Sh. Ratan Pal Singh, Authorized Representative of M/s Casio Computers Ltd. On the basis of said complainant, raids were conducted at three different places i.e. at Shop No. 331/4, New Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi from where total 14 counterfeit Casio Calculators bearing falsified trademarks were recovered from accused Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit, at Shop No. 333, New Lajpat Rai Market, total 270 counterfeit Casio Calculators bearing falsified Trademark were recovered from accused Mukesh Kumar and at Shop No. 36B/3, Nivea International, New Lajpat Rai Market from where total 7 counterfeit Casio Calculators bearing falsified Trademarks were recovered from accused Defencer Kumar Jain. The articles did not bear mandatory details like name of copyright holder, name of producer, Censor Board Certificate etc. as mandated. The same were kept by the accused persons for the purpose of selling. After completion of investigation present chargesheet has been filed.
FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 3 /7
3. On appearance of the accused persons, documents were supplied to them and thereafter charge under Section 63 of CR Act & 103/104 of TM Act framed against accused persons. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Despite various opportunities, the prosecution failed to secure the presence of main witness i.e. Authorized Representative Sh. Ratan Pal Singh who was complainant in the present matter. Prosecution could not trace the complainant/main witness Sh. Ratan Pal Singh and Director of EIPR Sh.
Gulfaraz Makhani despite repeated summons through DCP concerned on several opportunities on different dates of hearing. Hence, main witness/complainant Sh. Ratan Pal Singh and Sh. Gulfaraz Makhani were dropped from the list of the witnesses. In the absence of testimony of complainant Sh. Ratan Pal Singh, the factum of offence recovery of infringed articles and arrest of accused persons could not be proved. FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 4 /7
5. In the present matter, the main witness/complainant has already been dropped from the list of witnesses as he did not came forward with original documents for his examination. Since the most material witnesses have been dropped from the list of witnesses, hence there is nothing incriminating against the accused persons, proceeding further and recording the statement of remaining formal witnesses would be futile exercise and wastage of judicial time, resources and money. In the absence of the complainant/eye witness, the prosecution can never successfully prove the factum of offence in question.
6. It was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled "Satish Mehra vs. Delhi Administration & Anrs." reported as 1996 JCC 507, that "In case where there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction, the valuable time of the court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on a future date". Thus, PE has been closed. Since nothing incriminating has come on record against the accused persons, as such, FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 5 /7 recording of statement of accused persons is also dispensed with.
7. Brief submissions addressed by the Ld. APP for State and by the Ld. Defence Counsel have been heard and the documents on record carefully perused.
8. In the case in hand, there is no admissible evidence on record to prove the commission of offence by the accused persons. In absence of the admissible evidence, the prosecution has failed to prove that the act/ offence in question was actually committed.
9. The entire present case was rooted on the testimony of the complainant, however, he has been dropped from the list of witnesses. There is no other iota of incriminating evidence against the accused persons on record. The onus to substantiate the case is upon the prosecution. In the present case, prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 6 /7 reasonable doubt.
10. In view of the above discussion, Court is of the opinion that guilt of accused persons namely Subhas Chand @ Heera Pandit, Mukesh Kumar and Devender Kumar Jain has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and thus they are entitled to be acquitted. Accordingly, accused persons namely Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit, Mukesh Kumar and Devender Kumar Jain are acquitted for offence they have been charged with.
11. Requirements of Section 437A Cr.P.C have been complied with. File be consigned to record room after due compliance. GAJENDER Digitally signed by GAJENDER SINGH SINGH NAGAR Date: 2020.01.21 NAGAR 17:15:26 +0530 ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (GAJENDER SINGH NAGAR) COURT ON 21.01.2020 ACMM02 (CENTRAL)DELHI Containing 07 pages all signed by the presiding officer.
(GAJENDER SINGH NAGAR) ACMM02 (CENTRAL)DELHI FIR No. 149/2011 PS: EOW State Vs Subhash Chand @ Heera Pandit & Ors. Page No. 7 /7