Rakesh Khanna v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 03 Dec 2012
- Bench
- RITU BAHRI
Outcome
Disposed of
This petition is disposed of by giving liberty
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Copy Rights Act, 1957 ss. 63, 64
- Trade Marks Act, 1999 ss. 103, 104
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: None for the petitioner. Ms. Anmol Grewal, AAG, Punjab. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No. 99 dated 30.7.2011 under Sections 63/64 of the…
Judgment
Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri
To be referred to the Reporters or not?
Operative part
Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: None for the petitioner. Ms. Anmol Grewal, AAG, Punjab. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No. 99 dated 30.7.2011 under Sections 63/64 of the Copy Rights Act, 1957 (Amendment Acts 1984 & 1994), read with Sections 103, 104 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 registered at Police Station 'B' Division, Amritsar City. On a complaint made by Rohit Maggi, who is the Power of Attorney of Havells India Company Ltd., the shop of the accused petitioner was raided by police party headed by ASI Sukhdev Singh, Police Station Kotwali, Amritsar and 27 Crl. Misc. No. M-33892 of 2011 (O&M) [ 2 ] boxes containing duplicate wire of Havells, on which F.V.C. Insulated Industrial Cables Havells Life Line was written in English were found. The contents of the boxes were found to be duplicate and the FIR was registered in this background. After investigation, challan was presented against the petitioner on 28.2.2012. Thereafter, the charges have been framed on 26.9.2012as informed by ASI Panna Lal and the trial is fixed for evidence on 5.2.2013. At this stage, no case for quashing the aforesaid FIR is made out. This petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to take all the pleas before the trial Court.
3.12.2012 Rupi ( RITU BAHRI ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This petition is disposed of by giving liberty
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Copy Rights Act, 1957 — ss. 63, 64; Trade Marks Act, 1999 — ss. 103, 104.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 03 Dec 2012. The bench was RITU BAHRI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.