1

15. WP 2491.2021.doc

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2491 OF 2021

Suresh Dharmashi Gala

… Petitioner

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

... Respondents

Mr. R.V. Govilkar a/w. Ms. Shaba N. Khan a/w. Jitendra Pathadhe for

the Petitioner

Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b. Keral Mehta for the Respondent No.3

Ms. S.D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent – State

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR &

SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.

DATE : 25 NOVEMBER 2021

P.C. :-

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

This Petition is filed for quashing of the FIR No.150 of

2019 with the following prayer :-

(a)

This Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and

set aside the FIR bearing No. 150 of 2019 registered

under Section 51, 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957

2

15. WP 2491.2021.doc

registered at Narpoli Police Station, Bhiwandi on 15

March 2019 for the offence punishable under Section 63

and 51 of the Copyright Act, 1957 as well as chargesheet

bearing No.I-10/2020 dated 02/02/2020 filed by the

Respondent No.1 with the learned Judicial Magistrate,

First Class, Bhivandi, District – Thane, thereunder, in

the interest of justice by the Respondent No.2, as well as

all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom in view

of the compromise/settlement arrived between the

Petitioner and Respondent No2.”

3.

The ground on which the Petition is filed for quashing of

the FIR is that there is a settlement arrived at between the Petitioner

and the Respondent No.3 represented through the Respondent

No.2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondent

Nos. 2 and 3 state that in view of the settlement of this dispute

which is purely a commercial dispute, the FIR be quashed by consent

of the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and they seek to rely upon the

decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v/s. State of

Punjab and Anr.¹. Writ Petition taken up for disposal with consent.

4.

The Respondent No.2 is a representative of the

Respondent No.3. The Respondent No.3 has a registered trademark

“Eurobond” in respect of Aluminium Panel Sheets. It is the case of

the Respondents that the Respondent No.2 – Original Complainant

that on 15 March 2019, it was discovered that the Petitioner had

stored certain aluminium composite panels which were having

1

(2012) 10 SCC 303

3

15. WP 2491.2021.doc

marked 4Mann Eurobond and also that there were plates of

Eurobond Panel Products. With an allegation that the Petitioner

had committed offences under Section 51 and 63 of the Copyright

Act in respect of the trademark of the Respondent No.3 that the FIR

came to be lodged.

5.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have drawn our attention to the consent

terms which are filed in Interim Application (L) No. 9715 of 2021 in

Commercial IP Suit No. 157 of 2014 filed by the Respondent No.3.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos.2

and 3 state that the parties have agreed that the Petitioner will not

use the trademark Eurobond and has agreed for certain course of

action. It is submitted that in the light of these consent terms which

are taken on record by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 do not intend to proceed further with the

FIR that they have lodged.

6.

The Respondent No.3 has filed an affidavit wherein the

Respondent No.3 has stated as under :-

“(i)

I say that, this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated

15 June, 2015 passed in Notice of Motion (L) No. 2584

of 2014 restrained Eurobond Industries Private Limited

(presently known as 4MANN Industries Private

Limited) from using the impugned Eurobond trademark

4

15. WP 2491.2021.doc

and device or any other mark containing the words

EURO or EUROBOND or the device of globe

comprised within the arms of ‘U’ or any other mark

identical to or deceptively similar with the Re