Allahabad High Court
Mohd Anwar And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 October, 2025
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:178507
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36389 of 2025
Mohd Anwar And 4 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Akhilesh Chandra Mishra, Narendra Kumar Chaturvedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 22.04.2017 and cognizance order dated 21.03.2023 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur in Case no. 16797 of 2023 in connection with Case Crime no. 34 of 2017 under Section 63/65 Copyright Act, 1957, PS- Kotwali, District Gorakhpur as well as entire proceeding of Case no. 16797 of 2023 under Section 63/65 Copyright Act, 1957, PS- Kotwali, District Gorakhpur pending in court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that proceeding in shape of Case Crime no. 34 of 2017 under Section 63/65 Copyright Act, 1957 has been initiated against the applicants and other accused persons over the allegation that applicants are involved in selling fake product of reputed company i.e. Lakme. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that as per the allegation levelled in the FIR, statement of informant and recovery memo offence under Section 63 and 65 Copyright Act, 1957 is not made out against the applicant since there is no infringement of copyright. Learned counsel also relied upon judgment dated 23.07.2025 passed in Application u/s 528 BNSS No. - 20490 of 2025 (Kuldeep Kumar and 2 others) and sought parity with the same.He also submitted that co-accused Naushad Husain and Irshad Ahmad have already been granted relief by way of quashing entire proceeding vide judgment dated 23.8.2025 and 27.8.2025 passed by this Court in Application u/s 528 BNSS no. 31315 of 2025 (Naushad Husain vs. State of U.P. and another) and Application u/s 528 BNSS no. 29619 of 2025 (Irshand Ahmad and another vs. State of U.P. and another). Copy of said judgments is appended as Annexure no. 6 to the instant application.
4. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application but could not dispute the aforesaid argument.
5. Since the entire argument has been raised by learned counsel for applicant over legal issue as such process to issue notice to opposite party no. 2 is hereby dispensed with.
6. Before proceeding it would be apposite to reproduce Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 which is as follows:
"Section 63. Offences of infringement of copyright or other rights conferred by this Act.- Any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of--
(a) the copyright in a work, or
(b) any other right conferred by this Act [except the right conferred by section 53A],
[shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees:]
Provided that [where the infringement has not been made for gain in the course of trade or business] the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months or a fine of less than fifty thousand rupees.]
Explanation.-- Construction of a building or other structure which infringes or which, if completed, would infringe the copyright in some other work shall not be an offence under this section.
65. Possession of plates for purpose of making infringing copies.- Any person who knowingly makes, or has in his possession, any plate for the purpose of making infringing copies of any work in which copyright subsists shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 'two years and shall also be liable to fine."
7. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, this Court finds that implication of the applicant is under the Copyright Act, 1957 whereas the allegation whatsoever has been made which is apparent from the narration of the FIR is not attracting sections of Copyright Act since there is allegation of selling certain products having the emblem, logo and mark of a reputed company which is not covered under the Copyright Act in pursuance to Section 63 and 65 of Copyright Act, 1957. Section 63 and 65 of Copyright Act, 1957 are penal provisions that apply to cases involving infringement of copyright in original literary, artistic, musical, or cinematographic works, and use of tools for making unauthorized reproductions thereof. There is no specific averment or material on record to suggest that the accused has infringed any copyrightable content and in absence of same, invocation of Copyright Act, 1957 is clearly misplaced and unsustainable in law. Learned court concerned while passing impugned order dated 21.03.2023 ignored this aspect and as such the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. Moreover, parity of judgment dated 23.8.2025 passed in case of Naushad Husain (supra) is applicable in the instant matter also.
8. Impugned charge sheet dated 22.04.2017 along with cognizance order dated 21.03.2023 along with entire proceeding of Case no. 16797 of 2023 in connection with Case Crime no. 34 of 2017 under Section 63/65 Copyright Act, 1957, PS- Kotwali, District Gorakhpur is hereby quashed and set aside only in respect of applicants namely Mohd. Anwar, Samir Mustafa, Ashraf Ali, Shamsheer Ahmad and Ashram Mishra.
9. The application u/s 528 BNSS stands allowed.
10. However, the authorities are at liberty to proceed against applicants, if required, under the relevant sections of relevant Act.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
October 6, 2025
Shaswat
