PIYARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No. 294, dated 3.8.1989 under Sections 78 and 79 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (for short to be referred as "the Act") read with Section 420 IPC.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present controversy are that one Kishan Kumar Jindal failed a complaint under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act which was endorsed by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 10.5.1989, for inquiry with a further direction to seize the goods containing false trade marks from the person whoever found in possession of such goods and to take necessary action against such person or any other person found to be guilty of committing an offence punishable under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act. In complaint with the said directions, the police seized some iron girders and recorded DDR No. 38 dated 22.6.1989 in this respect alongwith bilty issued by Ashoka Akal Transport Company, G.T. Road, Mandi Gobindgarh. Thereafter, the police made a report that since offences under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act were non-cognizable and as such, the police could not proceed further. On receipt of the report of the Police, the Magistrate passed the following order on 27.7.1989 :-

(3.) SHRI R.S. Cheema, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has mainly contended that the procedure adopted by the Magistrate in directing the inquiry/investigation in a case, by the police, which was of non-cognizable offence, was not as per the provisions given in the Criminal Procedure Code. Admittedly, offence under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act being non-cognizable, the police could not investigate the same.