AMIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No.282 dtd. 28/5/2020, registered under Sec. 420 IPC and Ss. 63 and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act'), at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the case are that when complainant-Surender Kumar, Field Manager, Speed Search Security Networks Pvt. Ltd., who claims to have the authorization of the said firm to take action against the people who are manufacturing, selling or supplying counterfeited goods under the name and style of 'Luxmi', along with his team, conducted a survey in Pehowa City, they allegedly found out that the petitioner is selling and supplying counterfeited goods under the name of their authorizing company. Subsequently, he informed the Station Incharge, whereupon recovery of counterfeited goods were effected.

(3.) Learned counsel would contend that as per the allegations against the petitioner, he was manufacturing and selling counterfeited goods, purportedly manufactured by the Speed Search Security Networks Pvt. Ltd., under the name and style of 'Luxmi', which does not attract the offences under Ss. 63 and 65 the Act, 1957. It is his further submission that the said goods have a distinct label of 'KLC Luxmi' whereas the label used by the company of the complainant is 'Luxmi'. He relies on the judgments passed by this Court in the cases of Anil Kumar vs. State of Punjab and another, 2011 (18) RCR (Criminal) 304 and Gurmukh Singh and another vs. State of Punjab, 2011 (18) RCR (Criminal) 308.