Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114137 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25865 of 2008 Applicant :- Amit Agarwal And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Sivastava,Dharmendra Kumar Rajput Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri D.K. Rajput, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Shashidhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing of entire proceedings of complaint case no.3645 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 63/64 Copyright Act, P.S. Khair, District Aligarh, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh. 3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by O.P. no.2 (Advocate of M/s Ghari Detergent Private Limited) against the applicants on 14.01.2008 alleging that an information is received from his salesmen that the applicants are indulged in manufacturing duplicate Ghari Detergent Powder and Cake. Acting on the said information, the police party raided the shop of the applicants and recovered six packets of Ghari Detergent Powder along with the packing materials and wrappers of Ghari Detergent Powder. It was evident that the applicant was illegally trying to pass off his detergent as Ghari Detergent Powder. In the said matter, after investigation chargesheet was submitted on 26.02.2008 and the Court has taken cognizance. The entire proceedings have been challenged in this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as using the identical wrapper will not fall in the category of forged. He further submits that the criminal proceedings have been initiated due to business rivalry. The applicants are general merchant and only used to sell Ghari Detergent Powder and Cake in the shop, which was purchased from one Neeraj Agarwal, who is a authorized agent of Ghari Detergent Powder. He next contended that the instant proceedings is nothing else but a pure abuse of process of law. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that the lab report dated 08.05.2008 shows that the wrappers used by the applicants is identical to the wrappers used by the complainant. The applicants were illegally using the brand name, which belong to opposite party no.2, hence, the offence under Section 63/64 of Copyright Act is made out. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 6. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants. The cognizance order has been issued after perusing the material collected during investigation of the case. The issue herein is whether the applicant was illegally using the wrappers/brand of opposite party no.2 and trying to pass off his product in the brand name of opposite party no.2. This issue is a pure disputed question of fact which can only be adjudicated upon after adducing evidence. 7. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 9. Hence, the instant application cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad