RAJESH GARG Vs. TATA TEA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed to seek the quashing of the order dated 09.06.2003 passed by the Ld. ASJ Delhi in Crl. Revision No. 251/2003 arising out of FIR No. 204/2000 registered at P.S. Sabzi Mandi. By the impugned order, the court has allowed the revision petition under Section 397 CrPC, preferred by the respondent Tata Tea Ltd. against the discharge of the petitioner in the above mentioned criminal case by the Ld. ACMM vide his order dated 22.12.2000.

(2.) According to the case of the respondent/complainant, they are the registered trade mark holder in respect of Tata Tea since 1988, and they are the users of the said trade mark since then. They also claim to be the owners of the copyright in the artistic features displayed on the polypacks. They lodged a complaint before ACP (Crime Branch) IPR Section, Delhi under Sections 78-79 of the Trade Mark Act (TMA) and Section 63 of the Copyright Act (CRA) read with Section 420 Cr.P.C. against some unknown persons on 24.05.2000. Pursuant to that complaint, the Police conducted a raid at the petitioner's residence viz H. No. 1634, Sohan Ganj Sabzi Mandi Delhi on 24.05.2000. It is alleged that the petitioner was found filling and packing fake Tata Tea pouches of 250 gms. It is alleged that the police recovered a total of 130 filled pouches of tea containing falsified trademark of the complainant (the respondent herein) alongwith 1750 gms. of loose tea in an iron tub, weighing machine with container and weights of 200 gms. and 50 gms., 10 empty pouches of 50 gms. and a pouch sealing machine. It is further alleged that 400 filled infringing polypacks of Tata were also recovered from the ground floor room of the said premises. As per the allegations of the complainant, the tea was spurious and the petitioner was using false trademark of the respondent to market his tea. An FIR (as mentioned above) was registered under Section 63/65 of the CRA and Sections 78/79 of the TMA against the petitioner. After the police concluded its investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner under Section 63/65 of the CRA as well as Section 78-79 of the TMA.

(3.) The Ld. ACMM, however, in his order dated 22.12.2000 observed that the investigation in this case was done by the police without obtaining any permission of the court as was required under Section 155 Cr.P.C. Consequently, he held that the whole proceedings emanating therefrom stood vitiated. Therefore, the petitioner was discharged of all the allegations in the said FIR vide the order dated 22.12.2000.