Rachna Sagar Pvt Ltd vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 9 May, 2023

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Rachna Sagar Pvt Ltd vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 9 May, 2023

Bench: Jasmeet Singh

                          $~40
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     CRL.M.C. 3303/2023
                                RACHNA SAGAR PVT LTD                    ..... Petitioner
                                    Through: Mr Neeraj Grover, Mr Tarun Khurana, Mr
                                             Amarjeet Singh, Mr Rishi Vohra and Mr Rajat
                                             Sabu, Advs.
                                    versus
                                STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.               ..... Respondents
                                    Through: Mr Aashneet Singh, APP for State
                                              SI Ravindra Kumar, DIU/Central District
                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
                                             ORDER

                          %                  09.05.2023
                          CRL.M.A. 12353/2023

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 3303/2023

This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 189/2023 dated 28.04.2013, under Sections 103/104 Trade Marks Act, 1999, registered at Police Station - Darya Ganj and consequential proceedings, if any, emanating therefrom.

Mr Grover, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the FIR is a gross abuse of the process of law. He states that the present FIR is a counter blast to the rectification application filed by the petitioner. He states that the petitioner has been using the trade mark/label/device/logo of Rachna Sagar much prior to the use by the respondent No.2. He states that the respondent No.2 was never in the publication business and only as late as 2018, it Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed byAMIT ARORA Signing Date:12.05.2023 19:39:18 proposed to enter the publication business. He further states that in view of Section 110 of the Trade Marks Act, the FIR could not have been registered as the petitioner has a registered trademark in his favour.

Issue notice.

Mr Singh, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of the State. He seeks and is granted four weeks to file a status report.

Issue notice to the respondent No.2 by all modes including electronic on the petitioner taking requisite steps within one week from today, returnable on the next date of hearing.

Mr Singh, learned APP on instructions states that the apprehension of the petitioner regarding arrest is misplaced.

Even though there is no application for interim directions, this Court is competent to exercise its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C to grant interim directions. Since the dispute is with regard to infringement of the trade mark, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation as the entire evidence is documentary in nature.

The petitioner No.1 is a company and therefore, it is directed that the Directors and office bearers of the petitioner No.1 shall not be arrested in FIR No. 189/2023 dated 28.04.2013, under Sections 103/104 Trade Marks Act, 1999, registered at Police Station - Darya Ganj, subject to their joining and cooperating in investigation with supporting documents in their favour, as and when called by the IO.

List on 16.08.2023.

JASMEET SINGH, J MAY 9, 2023/sr Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed byAMIT ARORA Signing Date:12.05.2023 19:39:18

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders