HC orders free police assistance for court receivers in HUL counterfeit case

The court also criticised police officers for demanding official fees from the court receiver in exchange for assistance, clarifying that such a demand was unjustified. The receiver, it emphasised, acts as an extension of the judiciary and is not required to pay for police support in enforcing court orders

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has directed police officials to provide free assistance to court receivers in executing judicial orders. The directive came on February 11 while the court was hearing a copyright infringement case filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) over counterfeit products being sold under its brand name.

HC orders free police assistance for court receivers in HUL counterfeit case

HUL, India’s largest fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) company, had filed the suit through advocate Hiren Kamod against unidentified entities engaged in the large-scale production and distribution of counterfeit goods. The company, which owns renowned brands such as Kissan, Cornetto, Lux, Lifebuoy, Dove, Rin, Wheel, Surf Excel, Vim, Lakmé, Sunsilk, and Indulekha, discovered widespread counterfeit stock being sold in Mumbai’s Taloja and Crawford Market, as well as various towns and villages in Gujarat.

A subsequent investigation in June 2024 uncovered a vast network of unidentified entities involved in stocking, supplying, selling, and distributing fake products that closely resembled HUL’s original items. The counterfeit goods mimicked HUL’s trademarks and packaging, including Surf Excel’s distinctive splatter design, as well as branding elements of Dove, Clinic Plus, Lakmé, Indulekha, Vim, Rin, and Sunsilk.

Faced with the imminent risk of counterfeit products flooding the market, HUL approached the Bombay High Court. On June 18, 2024, Justice R I Chagla granted ad-interim relief by appointing a court receiver and an additional special receiver to search and seize the counterfeit goods. Advocate Kamod informed the court that the fake products were nearly identical to HUL’s, with every aspect of the company’s trademarks being copied.

However, on February 11, the court receiver submitted a report highlighting police inaction in assisting with the enforcement of the court’s orders. The court noted that this delay allowed the defendants to remove counterfeit products, thereby undermining its interim directive. In response, the court ordered six police officers from LT Marg police station to provide immediate and effective assistance in executing the orders.

The court also criticised police officers for demanding official fees from the court receiver in exchange for assistance, clarifying that such a demand was unjustified. The receiver, it emphasised, acts as an extension of the judiciary and is not required to pay for police support in enforcing court orders.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 21, directing the additional special receiver and the court receiver to submit their reports by March 12 and March 19, respectively.