Bangalore District Court
State By S J Park Police Station vs Persons Have Denied The Incriminating on 26 April, 2023
1
KABC030888822018
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 26th day of April 2023
Present : Sri.R.Mahesha.
B.A.L., LL.B.,
IX Addl.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
1.C.C.No. 32388/2018 2.Date of offence 28.11.2017 3.Complainant State by S J Park Police Station.
4.Accused 1. Dinesh Singh S/o.Madan Singh R/o.Manjunatha Nagar, Magadi Road, Bengaluru.
2. Jitendra Kumar S/o.Tara Ramji R/No.5, S P Road, Bengaluru.
2
3. Basanth @ Besara S/o.Savachi R/No.7, S P Road, Bengaluru.
4. Gandhi, Prakash Telecom, 1st Cross, S P Road, Bengaluru.
5. Rajesh Sharma, Advance Telecom, No.5, S P Road, Bengaluru.
6. Harish, Mahadeva Telecom, No.7, S P Road, Bengaluru.
5. Offences U/Sec.63 of Copyright Act & complained of Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC.
6.Plea Accused No.1 to 6 pleaded not guilty.
7.Final Order Accused No.1 to 6 are acquitted.
8.Date of Order 26-04-2023.
The Police Sub-Inspector of S J Park Police Station, 3 Bengaluru has filed this charge sheet against the accused No.1 to 6 for the offences punishable u/Sec. 63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 28/11/2017 at about 3.00 p.m. within the limits of S J Park Police Station, situated at Prakash Telecom, Mahadeva Telecom, Advance Telecom, S P Road, 1 st Cross, Bengaluru, the accused persons were selling the duplicate products i.e. iphone mobile accessories of CW.1 - K Murali Krisha Griffin Intellectual Properties Services Private Limited to the public, without obtaining the valid permission/license from the copyright owner and infringed the right of the copyright of the said company and also cheated to the public and also CW.1. Hence, CW.1 lodged first information. The Station House Officer registered a 4 case in Cr No.94/2017 for the offences punishable u/Sec.63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC, and submitted First Information Report to this Court. After investigation, Police Inspector of S J Park Police Station filed charge sheet for the said offences punishable u/Sec. 63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC. against the accused No.1 to 6. Hence, they have committed the alleged offences.
3. Accused No.1 to 6 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. After hearing on charge, this Court has framed charge for the offences punishable U/Sec. 63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5
4. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined 3 witnesses as PW.1 to 3 and got documents marked documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4 and closed the side of the prosecution evidence, and Statements u/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. recorded, read over and explained in the vernacular language of the accused persons, wherein accused persons have denied the incriminating circumstances appeared against them as false and did not choose to lead defence evidence. As such, the matter was posted for arguments.
5. I have heard the arguments on both sides.
6. The prosecution has been examined the CW.4 as PW.1, CW.6 as PW .2. Both have consistently deposed before this Court that on 28/11/2017 both were on duty at SJP road, CW.7 called them at about 3.00 pm 6 and he stated case facts of Cr.No.94/2017 of S J Park police station and he requested to assist to conduct raid. Accordingly, they went along with CW.7 to S P Road, CW.4 deputed for escort duty at Prakash Telecom shop and CW.6 deputed for the escort duty at Mahadeva Telecom. CW.7 verified both shops in the presence of panchas and informant and they found 13 items of counterfeit products of iphone company in Prakash Telecom and also CW.7 found some counterfeit products of iphone mobile in Mahadeva Telecom. They further deposed that CW.7 seized the said counterfeit products in the presence of panchas and informant, CW.7 took custody of accused No.1 and 2 and they went back to police station with accused and counterfeit products. Both have identified the accused persons and MO.1 to
13. Both have subjected cross-examination by the 7 accused. Both have clearly admitted that they did not sealed the seized articles at spot and they did not signed on the MO.1 to 13 at the time of seizing articles by CW.7 and they did not produced seized packs before this Court. They did not able to say before this Court that how much products are seized from Prakash Telecom and Mahadeva Telecom. They did not purchased any articles from the said shops before raiding. Both have admitted that the properties which are marked as MO.1 are easily available in open market in and around Bengaluru. Both have not signed on panchanama. CW.6 admitted in the cross- examination that the said panchanama wrote by CW.4, CW.4 admitted in the cross-examination panchanama wrote by one Ramesh Writer of S J Park police station. Both have denied other formal suggestions made by the accused counsel during the course of cross-examination. 8
7. The prosecution has been examined CW.1 informant as PW.3. He deposed before this Court that he being representative of Griffin Intellectual Company Limited. He working in the said company since 2013 to 2019. Further he deposed that on 28/11/2014 he gets credible information that in Prakash Telecom, Mahadeva Telecom and Advances Telecom they are situated at S P road and they were selling counterfeit products of apple company therefore he lodged FIS before S J Park police station. He further deposed that after that the police officers of S J Park police station were came near the said shops and seized counterfeit products of apple company from their shops. He identified the accused persons and MO.1. The accused persons selling counterfeit products of apple company without obtained permission from 9 apple company and they cheated public that the said articles are real products of apple company. He identified documents produced by him which are marked at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4. He has been subjected cross-examination. In the cross-examination he clearly admitted that he did not gave original products of apple company along with Ex.P.1 to police officers. He did not purchased any articles from the accused shops before lodging Ex.P.1. Further he admitted that the police officers did department seal on MO.1 and 2 but they did not get signatures on MO.1 and 2. Further he admitted that he did not produced original documents of Ex.P.3 before this Court and police officers. Further he admitted that he has special knowledge to give opinion as per Ex.P.4 and he produced certificate pertaining to his special knowledge before police officers and he denied other 10 formal suggestions made during the accused counsel during the course of cross-examination.
8. On perusal of entire evidence and documents it reveals that the Investigation Officer cited CW.1 to CW.7 in charge sheet, the prosecution has been examined only 3 witnesses as PW.1 to 3. Further it is relevant to note that despite took coercive steps against CW.2, 3, 5 and 7 the prosecution failed to secured their presence well in time. Therefore, CW.2, 3, 5 and 7 are dropped out on 10/1/2023. It is the case of the prosecution that on 28/11/2017 CW.1 gave FIS as per Ex.P.1. Accordingly, CW.7 take investigation proceeded to spot along with his staff and CW.1 and he called panchas at spot, all their presence he drawn seizure panchanama and seized Mo.1 and 2 and the said Mo.1 and 2 are counterfeit products of 11 apple company. In order to prove seizure panchanama the panch witnesses of CW.2 and 3 they are not stepped into witness box. PW.1 and 2 stated before this Court that they are present at the time of seizing of articles by CW.7 but they did not signed on seizure panchanama. Informant i.e. PW.3 stated in his chief-examination on 28/11/2014 he get credible information regarding selling of counterfeit products of apple company in Prakash Telecom, Mahadeva Telecom and Advance Telecom but he gave FIS on 28/11/2017. PW.3 admitted in the cross- examination he did not gave original apple company products and receipts purchase of counterfeit articles from the accused shop to police officer before lodging FIS. Further PW.3 and other police witnesses clearly admitted that they did not sealed seized articles at spot and they did not signed on Mo.1 and 2 they did not produced 12 sealed articles before this Court. The prosecution has been cited Cw.1 to 7 they able to examined only PW.1 to 3 despite took coercive steps against CW.2, 3, 5 and 7 they not yet stepped into witness box. Hence, they are dropped out by order dated 10/1/2023. Except police officers and interested witnesses no independent witnesses are examined. The prosecution failed to prove the alleged counterfeit articles were seized from the possession of accused persons as per seizure panchanama. So its creates serious doubt regarding the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused No.1 to 6 beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, this Court proceed and pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 6 are hereby acquitted of the offences 13 punishable u/Sec. 63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stands cancelled automatically. Properties shown in PF No.42/2017 shall be destroyed as worthless after the appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 26 th day of April 2023).
(R.Mahesha) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.14
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Ramu PW.2 : Manjunath PW.3 : Murali Krishna. LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION: Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.2 to 4 : Documents.
List of material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
NIL List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defence:
NIL List of documents marked on behalf of the defence:
NIL List of materials marked on behalf of the defence:
NIL.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.
15 16 26/04/2023 Judgment pronounced in the open court (Vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 6 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable u/Sec. 63 of Copyright Act and Sec.420, 511 r/w 149 of IPC. The bail bonds and surety bonds executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stands cancelled automatically.
Properties shown in PF No.42/2017 shall be destroyed as worthless after the appeal period is 17 over.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.