Anil Singla vs State Of H.P

Virender Singh, J

Apprehending his arrest, in case FIR No. 289 of 2023, dated 17.11.2023, under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC”) and Sections 63 and 65 of the Copy Right Act, 1957, registered with Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, applicant has filed the present application, under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Cr.P.C.’).

The applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the Investigating Officer/Police, to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case.

According to the applicant, the said FIR has been registered at the instance of Mr.Dinesh Jindal, who has lodged the same, with a view to harass the applicant and create undue pressure on him.

The applicant is stated to be the businessman by profession and having deep roots in the society. The case registered against him, is stated to be false.

The applicant, on 20.11.2023 filed the bail application, under Section 438 of Cr. P.C., before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, in which, interim protection was given to him. However, the application has been dismissed on 23.11.2023, by the Court, on the ground that the applicant is not cooperating with the Police. However, according to the applicant, in the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, it has been mentioned that the applicant was to join the investigation, as and when, required by the I.O.

Apart from this, the applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, directions are issued to the Police/I.O., under Section 438 of the Cr. P.C.

On all these submissions, Mr. Saurav Rattan, Advocate, has prayed that the bail application may kindly be allowed.

When put to notice, the Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 17.11.2023, complainant Dinesh Jindal, the Director, Tridev Spices Private Limited-91B, E.P.I.P. Industrial Area, Phase-I, Jharmajri, Baddi moved the complaint before the Police, mentioning therein that in the year 1992, he adopted a fanciful and distinctive trademark consisting of the word RUCHI in respect of spices, condiments and other food articles. The trademark RUCHI is always being represented in a special and artistic manner since its adoption, in the year 1992, till date. The aforesaid artistic style was adopted by the complainant by putting much labour and designing and the said work is the original artistic work of the complainant and he claims a copyright in the aforesaid artistic style of writing of the mark RUCHI, under Section 13(a) of Copyright Act, being the author of the said work, as defined under Section 17 of the Copyright Act. In fact, it is stated to be the only trademark represented in the special and artistic manner, which is being used by the complainant, in respect of his business of manufacturing and sale of spices and condiments.

8.1 Since, after its adoption, as aforesaid, the complainant started using the said trademark and in the artistic form, in his firm namely M/s Special spices industries, Baddi, District Solan, HP, he obtained Agmark certificate from the competent department i.e. Senior Marketing Officer, Department of Marketing and Impaction, in respect of spices and condiments, manufactured by the complainant, under the trademark RUCHI, adopted in the aforesaid special and artistic style.

8.2 It is the further case of the complainant that in order to protect his right over the said trademark and the artistic style RUCHI, he applied on 20.9.1994, for registration of the trademark RUCHI, claiming user since the year 1992. It is the further case of the complainant that the trademark RUCHI has been applied for registration for manufacturing of spices in the aforesaid special and artistic manner. As per him, he claims copyright over the said artistic style of writing of the trademark RUCHI under the Copyright Act, 1957, being the author and originator of the said original artistic work.

8.3 It is his further case that the copyright in the artistic work comes into existence, as soon as, the artistic work comes into existence and no registration of the said artistic work, is necessary, or is required, under the Copyright Act. The aforesaid trademark RUCHI, written alongwith its artistic style of writing, has become distinctive and is stated to be associated, solely with the complainant.

8.4 It has been mentioned in the complaint that in order to expand his business, the complainant formed a private limited company, under the name and style of ‘Tridev Spices Private Limited’, on 23.12 2008, which is duly registered with the Registrar of Companies Punjab, Himachal and Chandigarh. Presently, the complainant is stated to have been using the sand trademark RUCHI, written in aforesaid special and artistic manner, in the said Private Limited Company and is being continuously used for sale of spices, condiments and other food articles. Complainant is stated to be one of the Promoters Directors in the said Private Limited Company, since incorporation till date.

8.5 It is the further case of the complainant that he has been using the said trademark RUCHI, written in special and artistic manner, as aforesaid, for manufacturing and sale of spices, condiments and other food articles and the said trademark written in the aforesaid artistic manner, is duly printed on cache and every invoices, issued by him, in the aforesaid name. Thus, he claims to be the rightful owner and proprietor of the copyright in the mark RUCHI written in the aforesaid special and artistic manner and nobody else, without consent and permission of the complainant, can use the identical mark, written in the aforesaid identical artistic manner, and if done, the same shall amount to infringement of Copyright, as provided, under Section 151(a) and (b)of the Copyright Act.

8.6 It is the further case of the complainant that recently, complainant has come to know that M/s MMD Global Goods, having its address 165, HPSIDC, Baddi, Solan, HP., 173205, has applied for registration of the trademark RUCHI, written in the identical artistic manner, only on 8.9.2023 under application No. 6101462 in class- 30 for spices, pickles, noodles, besan and sauces. The aforesaid M/s MMD Global Foods has got printed packing/ cartons for use of spices and condiments bearing the trademark RUCHI, using the aforesaid infringing artistic style of writing, of which, the complainant is the lawful owner of Copyright therein. The aforesaid Anil Singla (applicant), Chintan Singla and Varun Himanshu Singla are found to be the partners and the persons responsible, for the conduct of business of the M/s MMD Global Foods, who have got the said packaging bearing the infringing copies, printed from M/s SS Enterprises, Hallo Mazara, Chandigarh, UT.

8.7 It is the further case of the complainant that due to the copying of an infringing copyright vested in the complainant, the aforesaid persons have committed a punishable offence. The business and reputation of the complainant is stated to be at stake and is likely to further causing irreparable loss to reputation due to the fact that the goods, on which the infringing work is copied and applied are, food articles, where any inferior quality will endanger the life of customers.

8.8 On the above facts, a prayer has been made to take action against the applicant, upon which the Police registered a case under Section 420-B of IPC and Sections 63 and 65 of the Copy Right Act. The investigation was initially conducted by ASI Raman Chauhan, Police Station, Baddi.

8.9 During investigation, the I.O. has searched the premises of MMD Global Foods. During search, 12 sacks of empty boxes of 100 mg, of Mark RUCHI, alongwith other articles were found. Apart from these, three boxes having 180 pieces of condiments were also found. Out of each sack, 5-5 pieces and out of each box, 1-1 container, were taken into possession, by the Police, for sample.

After perusing the status report, a direction was issued to the I.O. to release the applicant, with a direction to him, to join the investigation, in the event of his arrest, on 14.12.2023.

Thereafter, the matter was adjourned for 20.12.2023. On 20.12.2023, the Police filed the status report, according to which, on 15.12.2023, the applicant has joined the investigation. He has produced the Tax Invoice, by virtue of which, he has sold the spices, under the name and style of ‘RUCHI’ mark, since 2012.

As per the Police, the perusal of the said Tax Invoice shows that the mark RUCHI is being used by M/s MMD Global Foods, since 2012. It has been found that the company of the complainant Tridev Spices and the company of Anil Singla (applicant) have got the Copy Right registered for RUCHI mark.

Thereafter, the matter was adjourned for 20.12.2023. On that day, the complainant has put appearance, through his counsel, Mr. Shailender Kashyap, Mr. Sumit Sharma and Ms. Aanchal Singh, Advocates.

On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application.

The applicant has joined the investigation, as and when directed by the Police. The bail application cannot be rejected as a matter of punishment, as punishment can only be inflicted, after the full-fledged trial. The Police has investigated the matter and it can be proved during trial whether the applicant has, in fact, committed any offence or not.

In the status report, which has been filed, in this case, there is no iota of evidence, depicting the fact that the custodial interrogation of the applicant, is ever required by the Police, in this case. The accused is presumed to be innocent, till his guilt is proved, by the competent Court of law, after full fledged trial. No other criminal history of the applicant has been pleaded nor argued by the learned Additional Advocate General, during the course of the arguments.

At the time of deciding the bail application, the detailed discussion about the material collected by the I.O. should be avoided, as it would cause prejudice to the case of prosecution or to the case of accused.

Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the Police has not been able to make out a case for custodial interrogation of the applicant, as such, the interim order dated 14.12.2023 is liable to be made absolute.

Consequently, interim order dated 14.12.2023 is made absolute. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail, in case FIR No. 289 of 2023, dated 17.11.2023, under Sections 420 of IPC and Sections 63 and 65 of the Copy Right Act, registered with Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, on his furnishing personal bail bond, in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:

a)That the applicant will join the investigation of the case as and when, called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law;

b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court.

c) That the applicant will not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and

d) That the applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application.”

In view of above, the bail application is, thus, disposed of.

Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail application.

The applicant is directed to move regular bail application, when charge sheet will be filed in the Competent Court of law.

It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found violated by the applicant.