P.C. (Per Sandeep V. Marne, J.) :

1) The petition is shown to have been filed in public interest by six advocates seeking a restraint order against global fashion giant, PRADA from commercializing and using ‘toe ring sandals’ which is alleged to be deceptively similar to GI tagged product ‘Kolhapuri Chappal’ without securing authorisation from the registered proprietor or authorized users. Petition also seeks an public apology from

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 acknowledging unauthorized use of Kolhapuri Chappal GI product with a further direction of wider circulation of such apology through appropriate media. Petition seeks permanent injunction against use by Respondent No.1 of the GI Tagged product ‘Kolhapuri Chappal’, as well as, compensation to the artisans community for reputational and economic damages. Petitioners have also prayed for investigations to be conducted by Respondent Nos.3 to 5 against Respondent No.1 for violating the rights of GI registered proprietors. Petition also seeks framing of transparent and appropriate guidelines for licensing and collaboration when registered GI products are used by international brands and for initiation of awareness and enforcement measures for protection of ‘Kolhapuri Chappals’ and other GI products from similar unauthorized use.

2) Brief facts leading to filing of the PIL petition, as pleaded, are that, the GI product Kolhapuri Chappal has been registered under the provisions of Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration of Protection) Act, 1999 (the G.I. Act) vide Certificate dated 4 May 2009, which is renewed from time to time and is valid upto the year 2029. Respondent No.1-PRADA GROUP is a global fashion brand having its office at Milan, Italy. Respondent No.2 is an Indian subsidiary of Respondent No.1. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are collectively referred to as PRADA. According to the Petitioners, PRADA held the event of Spring Summer Men’s Collection at Milan, Italy on 22 June 2025 and introduced ‘Toe Ring Sandals’. During the course of the event, the designers did not acknowledge that the product was inspired from Kolhapuri Chappals. According to the Petitioners, the product showcased by PRADA in the said event, bears a striking resemblance to the traditional Kolhapuri Chappals and the product is reportedly priced at over Rs.1,00,000/-. Petitioners have highlighted the specialized human skills and time intensive process required for completion of each

pair of Kolhapuri Chappal and the art form developed over 800 years in India by the artisans. That PRADA is seeking to introduce deceptively similar product with ulterior objective of earning unauthorized profits through unauthorized use of the geographical indication of the registered proprietors. According to the Petitioners, the acts of PRADA violate provisions of Section 22 of the G.I. Act.

3) We have heard Mr. Hingmire, the learned counsel who is also Petitioner No.1 in the petition. He would submit that GI registration in respect of Kolhapuri Chappals has been secured after struggle for 23 long years with which Petitioner No.1 was closely associated. He would demonstrate the deceptive similarity between PRADA products and Kolhapuri Chappals. That if PRADA is permitted to copy the Kolhapuri Chappal for introduction of its own products in the market, the same would result in heavy losses to the persons engaged in the industry of manufacture and sale of Kolhapuri Chappals. That introduction of PRADA’s products would destroy the geographical importance of Kolhapuri Chappal. That since the GI has been registered in the name of Respondent No.4, unauthorized use thereof violates statutory rights not just of Respondent No. 4 but of Petitioners as well. That the impugned action of PRADA violates fundamental right under Articles 21, 29, 51A(f), as well as right under Article 46 of the Constitution of India. That introduction of PRADA products would adversely affect livelihood of lakhs of artisans and next generation of artisans would be