Prakash Prabhu v. State of Karnataka
In the High Court of Karnataka
Criminal Petition 2504/2019
Before Justice H.P. Sandesh
Decided on January 13, 2021

Relevancy of the case: Special law prevails over general law in trademark infringement

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420)
• The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Section 482)
• The Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Section 115)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The complainant was selling tea under the name QTF. Certain customers complained to him that someone was printing the label of QTF but not selling the same product.
• After the complainant investigated, it was found that there was a violation of his trademark under Section 115 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. After that, he registered an FIR with the police.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The respondent’s counsel submitted that in the case of Sharat Babu Digumarti v. Government of NCT Delhi (2017) 2 SCC 18, the accused was discharged under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. However, the accused could still be charged under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• In the same way, the petitioner may be discharged under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 but cannot escape Section 115 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Opinion of the Bench

• The court agreed with the Supreme Court’s view in the Sharat Babu Digumarti case that special acts prevail over general law. Thus, it agreed with the respondent counsel’s arguments.

Final Decision

• The petition stood rejected.

Marc Pereira, an undergraduate student at Rizvi Law College, Mumbai, prepared this case summary during his internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2022.