VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2011 › High Court of Delhi

Shailesh Navratna & Ors v. State & Anr

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
24 October 2011
Bench
Mukta Guptaauthor
Case no.
W.P.(CRL) 1466/2011

Follow Delhi High CourtFollow Mukta Gupta

Judgment

ORDER o

24.L0.2011 Crl. M.A. No. 12600/20LL(Exemption) Excmption allowed subjcct to all just exceptions' Application is disposed of. w.P.(cRL) 1466/2011 Ily this petition, the Petitioners seeks quashing of the FII{ No. 18612010 un<lcr Scction 63168(a), Copy Right Act, 1957 registcred at P.S. Khajuri Khas, New Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No. 2' 'l'hc allegations against the Petitioners as set out in the complaint arc that they used his artistic work 'SUMO' in connection with their goods' In this rcgard a search was conducted and seven thousand nine hundred bottles Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. ()/ bcaring inli'inging arlistic work were seized fiom the Petitioners. Itcspondent No. 2 who is present in Courl is identificd by his counsel and the investigating officer. I-Ie states that he has settled the matter and in vicw of the scttlement, he does not want to pursue the IrIR in cluestion and thc proceedings arising therefrom. The Respondent No.2 and the Petitioners statc that the seized bottles which are lying in the Malkhana have perished and thcy will be destroyed by the investigating agency. In vicw of the fact that the parties havc amicably resolved their differenccs of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no uscful purpose will be servcd in continuance of the proceedings, rather the sanc u'ould crcatc furlher acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Consequently, FIR No. 18612010 under Section 63168(a), Copy I{ight Act, 1957 registered at P.S. I(hajuri Khas, New Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby cluashed. Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgrnent of their statcmcnts made before this Courl. fhc pctition is disposed of. Order dasti. f^,-V,h,47rL ?^'"t 5 )'ol P il" u a'9crfiaf r-S ilaJa'r(, _Slcl MUKTA GUPTA,J fenh 'rc' 'v''1, w \u%o*

Case details

Parties and counsel

$-*INTHEIIIGHCOURToFDELHIATNEwDELHI -r- w.P.(cRL) 1466120lr SI-IAILITSFI NAVRATNA & OI{S ""' Petitioner Through Mr. Jay Bhardwaj, Advocate with Petitioners in person except Petitioner No. 3 VETSUS STATII & ANR ""' I{esPondcnt Through Mr. Salem Ahmed, ASC for the State with SI Anuj Kumar. Mr. Siddharlh Bansal, Advocate with Respondent No. 2 in Person. CORAM: IION'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.