[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Sanjay Sethi And Anrs vs The State Gnct And Anrs on 12 March, 2026
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 12th March, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 184/2026 & CRL.M.A. 703/2026
SANJAY SETHI AND ANRS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Durgesh Pal with Mr. Anish
Pandey, Advocates with petitioners in
person.
versus
THE STATE GNCT AND ANRS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State
with Insp. Naveen and SI Prabhash,
DIU
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. The present petition seeks quashing of FIR No.125/2021 dated
24.03.2021, registered at Police Station Lahori Gate, for commission of
offences under Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957, along with all
consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise
arrived at between the parties.
2. The abovesaid case was registered on the basis of a complaint of
Authorized Representative of M/s Rajdhani Flour Mills Limited, who had
alleged that certain unknown persons/entities had engaged in illegal,
unauthorized and unlawful manufacturing and selling of counterfeit products
of M/s Rajdhani Flour Mills Ltd. using its name, label and brand. On the basis
of such complaint, police officials of Lahori Gate conducted raid and the
petitioners herein were apprehended, from two different premises, with 53
kgs of besan, which was alleged to be counterfeit.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 appears through video
conferencing and submits that the matter has been amicably settled and the
complainant is no longer interested in pursuing with the abovesaid criminal
case and would have no objection if the FIR is quashed.
4. The petitioners are present with their respective counsel.
5. The Authorized Representative of respondent No.2 i.e. Sh. Kuldeepak
Lamba is present in person and submits that, as per the specific approval from
the Company, even the Company is not interested in pursuing with the matter.
The Memorandum of Understanding(MoU) dated 15.09.2025 has been
placed on record whereby both the parties have agreed to resolve and settle
their disputes amicably and, resultantly, the complainant has agreed to give
'no objection' and to cooperate with the petitioners herein for getting the FIR
in question quashed. It is also mentioned therein that both the parties have
compromised out of their own free will, without any pressure or coercion.
Respondent No.2-Sh. Kuldeepak Lamba identifies his signatures on such
MoU and reiterates the terms of undertaking.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the instructions,
the petitioners have no previous involvement of any nature whatsoever.
7. Though, the petitioners are ready to tender their apology, fact remains
that they were authorized vendors of the complainant-Company and the besan
in question had been purchased by them under valid documents and it was
only perhaps because of discolouring of the outer bags that the confusion had
cropped up.
8. The authorized representative Mr. Kuldeepak Lamba also submitted
that when the packets were seized, there was some discolouring and,
therefore, it was not very clear whether the packets were genuine or not. He
submits that the contents of such packets were never got tested anywhere.
9. When asked, it was apprised that charge-sheet has already been filed
and charges have also been ascertained and the trial is underway.
10. The case is already around five years old and, keeping in mind the
abovesaid settlement, no useful purpose would be served by permitting
continuance of the abovesaid proceedings, particularly, when the matter has
been amicably settled between the parties and the complainant does not want
any action against either of the petitioners.
11. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the FIR instant.
12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.125/2021 dated
24.03.2021, registered at Police Station Lahori Gate, for commission of
offences under Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957along with all consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed subject to petitioners
depositing cost of Rs.10,000/- each with concerned Delhi Legal Services
Authority (DLSA) within four weeks.
13. Proof of deposit of such cost as well as Original Settlement
Deed/Memorandum of Understanding dated 15.09.2025 and the original
affidavits of petitioners and respondent No.2, copies of which have been filed
with the present petition, shall be submitted before the learned Trial Court on
or before the next date of hearing so that these become part of Trial Court
Record.
14. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
15. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
MARCH 12, 2026/st/pb
