One Cannot Be Prosecuted U/s. 63 Of Copyright Act & Sec. 420 IPC Simply Because He Possessed Spurious Goods: Madras HC

While dealing with a petition seeking to quash the final report for the alleged offences under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (Copyright Act) and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC), the Madras High Court held that unless there is an infringement related to original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, cinematograph films and sound recordings, the provisions of the 1957 Act are not applicable.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Sunder Mohan observed that "The possession of spurious goods is certainly not a legal act. However, in the absence of the ingredients to constitute the offence of cheating, one cannot be prosecuted merely because he was in possession of spurious goods".

The Bench, therefore, clarified that to constitute the offence of 420 IPC, there must be a deception practised on any person dishonestly or fraudulently.

Advocate I. Abdul Basith appeared for the Petitioner, whereas none appeared for the Respondents.

In a brief background, the Petitioners were found in possession of counterfeit Adidas/Reebok ready-made Garments, Tags, Accessories and Labels. It was the case of Petitioners that the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act was not made out since copyright would apply only to the works mentioned in Section 13 of the Copyright Act. It was pleaded that there was no complaint from any person or consumer that they had been cheated by the purchase of any of the goods sold by the Petitioners. This was opposed by submitting that the mere fact that the Petitioners had spurious branded items, was enough to infer that the said goods were intended to deceive the public and gain wrongfully. Accordingly, the Petitioners had approached the High Court.

After perusing the final report, the High Court found that the allegations against the Petitioners would not attract the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act.

Further, the High Court navigated through Section 13 of the Copyright Act and stated that unless the infringement related to original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, cinematograph films and sound recordings, the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act was not made.

As regards the offence under Section 420 IPC, the Bench observed that there was nothing in the final report to suggest that there was any deception practised upon any person.

Accordingly, the Bench quashed the final report and allowed the criminal petition.

Cause Title: Chainsingh and Anr. v. State and Anr.

Click here to read/download the Judgment