SIVAJI HI-TEC FOODS PVT LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The criminal original petition in Crl.O.P.No.1379 of 2019 has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No. 6 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police registered for the offence under Section 51(b)(i) and 63(a) of Copy Right Act 1957.

(2.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.O.P. No.1379 of 2019, submitted that the petitioner is arraigned as A2 and it is alleged that the petitioner has supplied duplicate Sivaji Brand products and thus infringed the copy right and trade marks of the defacto complainant. The second respondent claimed that he has given copy right for the artistic work comprising of Get-up and colour scheme associated with Sivaji Brand. He further submitted that the complaint is not maintainable since the defacto complainant is not the only person using the said trade mark and copy right application itself is not maintainable and it ought to have been rejected for the reason that it is not an original artistic work as mandated under Section 13 of Copy Rights Act 1957. He further submitted that the offence registered by the first respondent is non cognizable offence. Therefore under Section 155 of Cr.P.C., no police officer can investigate the non cognizable offence without the order of the Magistrate. As the impugned FIR has been registered by the first respondent without any order of Magistrate, it is liable to be quahsed.

(3.) Insofar as the petition in Crl.O.P.No.6100 of 2019 is concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner lodged a complaint before the respondent, but the respondent did not register the case for the reason that the crime committed by the accused is allegdely for the offence under the provisions of Copy Rights Act and as such the police officer has no power to register the same, since the offence is a non cognizable offence. Therefore, the petitioner sought for a direction to register the complaint dated 05.02.2019.