Dismissed

Tyco International Services Gmbh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC8 Feb 2018W.P.(CRL)/3516/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench observed that the investigation into the petitioner was stalled due to failure to execute a raid. The court directed the investigating officer to conduct a raid on 15.02.2018 at a fixed time to seize infringing articles, providing the address only in the morning of the raid to prevent leakage of information.

What did the court decide?

Directed that a raid to seize infringing articles be conducted on 15.02.2018 at a time fixed between parties, with the address made available in the morning of the raid.

Tyco International Services Gmbh Vs State of NCT of… — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~12

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 3516/2017

¶4

TYCO INTERNATIONAL SERVICES GMBH

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr Saif Khan and Mr Achuthan Shreekumar, Advs

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

¶9

..... Respondents Through: Mr Piyush Singhal, Adv for Mr Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for State with SI Pradeep Kumar

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

% 08.02.2018

¶14

The petitioner is aggrieved by the manner in which the investigation is being carried out in the present case. Investigation was initially being carried out by the local police but thereafter it had been transferred to the DIU. The present investigating officer SI Pradeep Kumar is present in court. He is the 3^rd investigating officer who has been changed in the present proceedings; the last investigation officer submits that he has received the file of this case in December 2017. This court has further been informed that the complaint under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C had been filed by the complainant which is now pending before the learned ACMM and an Action taken report (ATR) has been sought by the learned ACMM. The next date fixed before the learned ACMM is 23.03.2018.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that there are various lapses being committed by the investigating officer and he is

¶16

not allowing the investigation to progress. His submission is that raid of the offending / infringing articles has not yet taken place. On this count learned counsel for the respondent, under instructions, submits that the address where the infringing articles have to be recovered has not yet been disclosed. The petitioner points out that this address cannot be disclosed till the last minute as there may be leakage of information which may then frustrate the raid.

¶17

It is accordingly directed that the investigating officer will conduct a raid and seize the infringing / offending articles; the raid be conducted on 15.02.2018 at a time to be fixed inter se the parties. The address where from the infringing articles have to be recovered will be made available to the investigating officer in the morning of 15.02.2018 (this is to safeguard the interest of the petitioner) and a copy of the same shall be placed before the court of the learned ACMM. The raid would be conducted and the outcome of the same will thereafter be informed to the court of the learned ACMM by the respondent by filing an appropriate status report to the said effect. Learned ACMM will thereafter deal with the matter and ensure that the investigation is completed at the earliest.

¶18

This petition is not pressed any further. Petition disposed of in the above terms.

¶19

Order dasti under the signature of the Court Master.

¶20

INDERMEET KAUR, J

¶21

FEBRUARY 08, 2018 / SU

Tyco International Services Gmbh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tyco International Services Gmbh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravinder Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Vinod Kumar Vs the State (N.C.T of Delhi)

Hira Lal & Anr. Vs State & Ors.

Aslam & Ors. Vs State (the NCT of Delhi)& Ors.

Jitender Singh & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Uzma & Anr. Vs State & Ors.

Bal Kishan Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Kumar Pal Vs State

Ravinder Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Vinod Kumar Vs the State (N.C.T of Delhi)

Jagpal & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Syed Shahbaz Hussain Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Lama Hussain Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Satish Kumar Pawa Vs Directorate of Enfrocement & Anr.