The Madras high court quashed the chargesheet against two men for possessing duplicate merchandise comprising bags, caps and belts of athletic brands Reebok and Adidas.
The petitioners - Chain Singh and Sujan Singh – moved the high court seeking to quash the proceedings against them for offences under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
On June 7, justice Sunder Mohan observed that the allegation would not attract the offence under the Copyright Act “unless the infringement relates to original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, cinematograph films and sound recordings”.
The counsel for the two petitioners, Abdul Basith, argued that the Act does not apply to garments and other products mentioned in the police report and that there is no complaint from any person or consumer that they have been cheated on the purchase of these goods sold by the petitioners. “…and in the absence of such an allegation, the offence under Section 420 IPC is not made out,” the counsel contended.
Additional public prosecutor, A Damodaran, countered that the mere fact that the petitioners were in possession of “spurious branded items” is enough to infer that the said goods were intended to deceive the public and gain wrongfully.
The court said that while the “possession of spurious goods is certainly not a legal act, “in the absence of the ingredients to constitute the offence of cheating” a person cannot be prosecuted merely because of possession.
{{/usCountry}}The court said that while the “possession of spurious goods is certainly not a legal act, “in the absence of the ingredients to constitute the offence of cheating” a person cannot be prosecuted merely because of possession.
{{/usCountry}}“In order to constitute the offence of 420 IPC, there must be a deception practised on any person dishonestly or fraudulently,” justice Mohan said, adding that in this case, it does not satisfy those “necessary ingredients” to attract the offence of Section 420 IPC.