In an important observation, the Supreme Court has held that Section 63 (infringement of copyright) of the Copyright Act is a cognizable and non-bailable offence.
The Division Bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna while deciding a criminal appeal further observed that if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for three years and onwards but not more than seven years the offence is a cognizable offence.
In the appeal, Delhi High Court order quashing FIR filed against the respondents for the offences under Sections 63 and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957 has been assailed. The High Court in the impugned order held that the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act is not a cognizable and a non-bailable offence.
Learned Counsel for appellant vehemently submitted that the High Court has committed a grave error in observing and holding that the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Copyright Act is a non-cognizable offence and it does not fall within Part II of the First Schedule of the Cr.P.C.
Reliance was placed on Intelligence Officer, Narcotics C. Bureau Vs. Sambhu Sonkar & ANR, 2001 Latest Caselaw 57 SC to submit that the maximum term of imprisonment that is prescribed for the said offence, cannot be excluded for the purpose of classification of the offence.
On the other hand, Learned Senior Counsel for respondent cited Rakesh Kumar Paul Vs. State of Assam, 2017 Latest Caselaw 574 SC to contend that the expression “not less than 10 years” would mean punishment should be 10 years and therefore, Section 167(2) (a)(i) would apply.
The Court after analysing the relevant provision, noted that for the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act the maximum punishment which can be imposed would be three years and therefore only in a case where the offence is punishable for imprisonment for less than three years or with fine only the offence can be said to be non-cognizable.
Stating that the language of the provision in Part II of First Schedule is very clear and there is no ambiguity whatsoever, the Court noted that the rationale of Rakesh Kumar Paul would not apply in Section 63 of the Copyright Act.
"It is observed and held that offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act is a cognizable and non-bailable offence."
The impugned judgement and order has been accordingly set aside.
Case Title: M/s Knit Pro International Versus The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Case Details: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 807 of 2022
Coram: Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
