Dharmender Pandey vs Govt. Of India & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 5041 Del

$~24
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                           Date of Decision: 15.07.2015
+      W.P.(C) 6690/2015
       DHARMENDER PANDEY                           ..... Petitioner
                   Through:              Mr.Mayank Mohan, Adv.

                            versus

       GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS                         ..... Respondents
                     Through:            Mr.Akshay Makhija along with
                                         Mr.Rohitendra Deb, Advs. for
                                         R-1 & 2
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
                            JUDGMENT

Ms.G.ROHINI, Chief Justice (Oral)

1. The petitioner who claims to be very sensitive towards religious sentiments, filed this petition with the following prayers:

"a) Issue appropriate order/direction to respondents No.1 & 2 for cancellation of the trademark license of Tulsi tobacco products;

b) Issue appropriate Writ or any other suitable Writ thereby directing the respondent No.3 for not using the name and picture of Saint Tulsi Das from the wrapper/pouch of Tulsi Tobacco, in the interest of justice;

c) Pass any other or further order(s) / relief(s) which this Hon‟ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents, in the interest of justice."

2. It is alleged in the petition that the wrapper of the product „Tulsi Royal Zaffrani Zarda‟ manufactured/marketed by respondent no. 3 bears the picture of Saint Shri Tulsidas Ji and that it outrages the religious feelings of Hindu Community and therefore, the respondent no.3 shall be prosecuted under the relevant provision of law and he shall be restrained from using the name and picture of Saint Tulsidas on the wrapper of the said product.

3. Even assuming that the plea of the petitioner that the Respondent No.3 is manufacturing/marketing such product is true, it is for the petitioner to take the appropriate steps before the proper forum and to establish that the alleged action of the respondent no. 3 is contrary to law.

4. According to us, the matter does not involve any element of public interest and therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the petition.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail other remedies available under law for redressal of his grievance

CHIEF JUSTICE

JAYANT NATH, J JULY 15, 2015 pmc