SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(P&H) 236

AMARBIR SINGH GILL
Piyara Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

Amar Bir Singh Gill, J.

1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No. 294, dated 3.8.1989 under Sections 78 and 79 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (for short to be referred as "the Act") read with Section 420 IPC.

2. The facts giving rise to the present controversy are that one Kishan Kumar Jindal failed a complaint under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act which was endorsed by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 10.5.1989, for inquiry with a further direction to seize the goods containing false trade marks from the person whoever found in possession of such goods and to take necessary action against such person or any other person found to be guilty of committing an offence punishable under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act. In complaint with the said directions, the police seized some iron girders and recorded DDR No. 38 dated 22.6.1989 in this respect alongwith bilty issued by Ashoka Akal Transport Company, G.T. Road, Mandi Gobindgarh. Thereafter, the police made a report that since offences under Sections 78 and 79 of the Act were non-cognizable and as such, the police coul











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top