Case- Atulbhai Rasikbhai Dudhwala vs State Of Gujarat (R/SCR.A/693/2014)
Decided on: 27th June 2023
CORAM: HON’BLE Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt
Introduction
In this case, the petitioners filed a petition seeking multiple reliefs, including the quashing of an FIR and charge sheet related to allegations of copyright and trademark infringement. The petitioners’ counsel argued that the allegations in the FIR were baseless and did not fall under the purview of the Copyright Act or the Trade Marks Act.
Facts of the Case
According to the councel, the complainant, the first informant, needed the authorisation or assignment to carry out procedures related to copyright infringement. The allegations were that the petitioners were selling duplicate spare parts of the Hyundai Company. The counsel argued that the Copyright Act and Trade Marks Act did not apply to the sale of automobile goods and that the provisions of these acts were not applicable in this case.
Furthermore, the counsel contended that the first informant had not provided any evidence to prove that he was authorised to file the complaint on behalf of the Hyundai Company. They argued that the FIR abused the court’s process and should be quashed, citing a previous judgment that they believed applied to the present case.
The respondent’s counsel, representing the state, agreed that the allegations in the FIR did not relate to items covered under the Copyright Act. However, they argued that the FIR was filed for offences under specific sections of the Copyright Act and the Trade Marks Act.
Judgement
After considering the submissions and examining the FIR, the court found that the allegations did not fall within the scope of the Copyright Act, as the spare parts in question were not considered artistic works. The court also noted that the FIR did not establish the complainant’s capacity to claim rights under the Copyright Act or the Trade Marks Act.
Based on these findings, the court concluded that no prima facie case was made out under the relevant sections of the acts. They deemed continuing the criminal proceedings to abuse the court’s process and quashed the FIR, charge sheet, and all related proceedings.
In summary, the court granted the petitioners’ request to quash the FIR and charge sheet, as the allegations of copyright and trademark infringement were deemed baseless and not applicable. The court found that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the court and law, and therefore, the FIR and all related proceedings were quashed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has over 20 years of experience in various sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aadit Shah
