Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L.Victoria Gowri, J
Veerasekar – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu Represented By, The Inspector of Police, IPREC Trichy Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenge to seizure order due to lack of trademark authority. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on lawful possession and supplier details. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court analyzed authority, procedural compliance, and economic loss prevention. (Para 5) |
| 4. impugned order set aside based on defective seizure. (Para 7) |
| 5. order for interim release with conditions established. (Para 8) |
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case is filed, challenging the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.166 of 2025 in Crime No.3 of 2025 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pudukottai and to return 1,350 kg of rice bags to the petitioner seized by the respondent Police.
Factual Matrix:-
2.On 22.01.2025, at about 12:30 p.m., the defacto complainant Sales Manager of Manchukonda Agrotech Private Limited lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner, who trades as M.M.Agro Mills, was selling rice bearing the complainant’s registered trademark and copyrighted packaging. Acting on the complaint, the respondent police registered a FIR in Crime No.3 of 2025 under Sections 51 (b)(i) & 63(a), Copyright Act, 1957 , and seized 1,350 bags of rice. The seized property was produced before the learned Judicial Magistra
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
