Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.32 seconds)Camlin Pvt. Ltd. vs National Pencil Industries on 7 November, 1985
7. So far as offence u/s.63 of Copyright Act, 1957 is concerned , in the
case of Camlin Indian Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Pencil Industries, AIR
1986, Delhi 444 , Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as follows :
Brundaban Sahu vs B. Rajendra Subudhi on 30 September, 1985
11. Ld. counsel for the accused placed reliance on the case of Brindavan
Sahu Vs. B. Rajendra Subudhi, AIR 1986 ORISSA 210.
State Of Maharashtra Etc. Etc vs Som Nath Thapa, Etc. Etc on 12 April, 1996
Reliance placed on the cases of Union of India vs. Prafulla
Kumar AI R 1979 Supreme Court 366 : State of Maharashtra and
others vs. Som Nath Thapa and others JT 1996 (4) SC 615 ; State
of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, AI R 1977 S C. 2018: (1 977 CRI LJ
1606) ; Umar
Abdula Sakoor Sorathia vs. Intelligence officer
narcotic control bureau JT 1999 (5) SC 394 ; Kallu Mal Gupta vs.
State 2000 I AD Delhi 107.
Umar Abdul Sakoor Sorathia vs Intelligence Officer, Narcotic ... on 6 August, 1999
Reliance placed on the cases of Union of India vs. Prafulla
Kumar AI R 1979 Supreme Court 366 : State of Maharashtra and
others vs. Som Nath Thapa and others JT 1996 (4) SC 615 ; State
of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, AI R 1977 S C. 2018: (1 977 CRI LJ
1606) ; Umar
Abdula Sakoor Sorathia vs. Intelligence officer
narcotic control bureau JT 1999 (5) SC 394 ; Kallu Mal Gupta vs.
State 2000 I AD Delhi 107.
Kallu Mal Gupta vs State on 29 October, 1999
Reliance placed on the cases of Union of India vs. Prafulla
Kumar AI R 1979 Supreme Court 366 : State of Maharashtra and
others vs. Som Nath Thapa and others JT 1996 (4) SC 615 ; State
of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, AI R 1977 S C. 2018: (1 977 CRI LJ
1606) ; Umar
Abdula Sakoor Sorathia vs. Intelligence officer
narcotic control bureau JT 1999 (5) SC 394 ; Kallu Mal Gupta vs.
State 2000 I AD Delhi 107.
The Copyright Act, 1957
State Of Orissa vs Debendra Nath Padhi on 29 November, 2004
10. Even otherwise, lawis well setted that at the stage of charge, only those
material which are relied upon by the prosecution can be looked into and
the documents filed by the accused cannot be looked into. It was so
held in case of State of Orissa vs. Debender Nath Padhi 2005 (1)
JCC 109 by a three judge bench of hon'ble SC after considering
section 91 of the criminal procedure code held in para 25 "Any
document or other thing envisaged under the aforesaid provision can be
ordered to be produced on finding that the same is 'necessary or
desirable for the purpose of investigation, inquiry, trial or other
proceedings' under the code.
Sheo Ratan Upadhya vs Gopal Chandra Nepali And Anr. on 21 May, 1964
Reliance is also placed upon the case of AIR
1965 Allahbad 274, Sheo Ratan Upadhyay Vs. Gopal Chandra
Nepall, by the accused , but the said case was regarding u/s. 63 of the
Copyright Act, 1957, only and we have already mentioned above that
section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957, is not applicable in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.
1