{"id":28519,"date":"2026-07-29T06:54:17","date_gmt":"2026-07-29T06:54:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=28519"},"modified":"2026-07-29T06:58:27","modified_gmt":"2026-07-29T06:58:27","slug":"karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 id=\"h-introduction\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Karnataka High Court recently addressed a vital procedural and jurisdictional issue regarding intellectual property offenses in criminal law. The case centered on whether police authorities can bypass statutory procedures prescribed under specialized statutes by invoking provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957, for cases involving counterfeit trade mark goods. The ruling re-emphasizes the strict statutory safeguards provided under intellectual property statutes to prevent procedural lapses during law enforcement operations.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_85 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Factual_and_Procedural_Background\" >Factual and Procedural Background<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Case_Overview\" >Case Overview<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Dispute_Before_the_Court\" >Dispute Before the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Key_Legal_Issues\" >Key Legal Issues<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Reasoning_and_Analysis_of_the_Court\" >Reasoning and Analysis of the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Court_Findings_at_a_Glance\" >Court Findings at a Glance<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Final_Decision_of_the_Court\" >Final Decision of the Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Point_of_Law_Settled\" >Point of Law Settled<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Legal_Principles_Reaffirmed\" >Legal Principles Reaffirmed<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Case_Details\" >Case Details<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Key_Takeaways\" >Key Takeaways<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Written_By\" >Written By<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#Important_Links\" >Important Links<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-factual-and-procedural-background\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Factual_and_Procedural_Background\"><\/span>Factual and Procedural Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The proceedings originated from Crime No. 88\/2025 registered at Upparpet Police Station, Bengaluru City. Following an investigation, a charge sheet was submitted in C.C. No. 22293\/2025 before the IX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The charges were framed under Sections 51(1)(b), 63, and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The core allegation against the accused was that he was involved in storing and selling counterfeit apparel bearing famous brand labels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The petitioner challenged the proceedings by filing a petition under Section 422 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita), praying for the quashing of the charge sheet and pending criminal proceedings. The petitioner argued that the underlying facts of the case, even if taken as true, did not attract the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-case-overview\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Overview\"><\/span>Case Overview<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Particular<\/th><th>Details<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Crime Number<\/td><td>Crime No. 88\/2025<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Trial Case<\/td><td>C.C. No. 22293\/2025<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Police Station<\/td><td>Upparpet Police Station, Bengaluru City<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Court<\/td><td>IX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Statutory Provisions Invoked<\/td><td>Sections 51(1)(b), 63, and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Nature of Allegation<\/td><td>Storage and sale of counterfeit apparel bearing famous brand labels<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-dispute-before-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dispute_Before_the_Court\"><\/span>Dispute Before the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The primary legal issue before the Court was whether selling goods bearing false brand labels attracts criminal liability under the Copyright Act, 1957, or under the Trademarks Act, 1999. A connected issue was whether search and seizure operations conducted by police officers below the rank prescribed under Section 115(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, render the prosecution legally unsustainable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The petitioner contended that the allegations related strictly to trade mark infringement and false trade descriptions. Consequently, the police ought to have followed the procedure established under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which mandates that search and seizure operations must be carried out by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and only after obtaining the statutory opinion of the Registrar of Trade Marks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The state argued that the charge sheet had been validly filed based on the initial registration under copyright provisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-key-legal-issues\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Legal_Issues\"><\/span>Key Legal Issues<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Whether counterfeit branded goods amount to copyright infringement or trade mark infringement.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether prosecution under the Copyright Act, 1957, was legally maintainable.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether compliance with Section 115(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, is mandatory.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether non-compliance with statutory search and seizure requirements invalidates the prosecution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-reasoning-and-analysis-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Reasoning_and_Analysis_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Reasoning and Analysis of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court analyzed the scope of copyright protection under Section 13 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which covers original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works; cinematographic films; and sound recordings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court observed that for an offense under copyright law to be attracted, there must be an allegation of infringing an original work in which copyright subsists. Where the allegation is simply that a trader is selling counterfeit clothing items carrying brand logos, no claim to original creation or copyright violation is established against the accused.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court emphasized that such acts fall squarely under Section 104 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which provides penalties for selling or possessing goods bearing false trade marks or descriptions. Since the subject matter related to trade mark violations, the mandatory provisions of Section 115 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, became applicable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Section 115(4) explicitly dictates two indispensable requirements for searching and seizing counterfeit goods: the operation must be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (or equivalent), and the officer must obtain an opinion from the Registrar of Trade Marks before executing the search.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Relying on established judicial precedents, including earlier rulings in Criminal Petition No. 2080 of 2023 (decided on June 19, 2024) and Criminal Petition No. 6096 of 2016 (decided on February 28, 2019), the Court pointed out that investigating agencies cannot circumvent statutory protections by registering cases under the Copyright Act to avoid the requirements of the Trade Marks Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Because the search in the present case was conducted by an officer below the rank of deputy superintendent of police without obtaining the mandatory registrar&#8217;s opinion, the search, seizure, and subsequent charge sheet were fundamentally flawed and unsustainable in law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-court-findings-at-a-glance\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Court_Findings_at_a_Glance\"><\/span>Court Findings at a Glance<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Issue<\/th><th>Finding<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Nature of offence<\/td><td>Trademark offense, not copyright infringement<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Applicable law<\/td><td>Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Mandatory procedure<\/td><td>Section 115(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Required rank of investigating officer<\/td><td>Deputy Superintendent of Police or above<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Registrar&#8217;s opinion<\/td><td>Mandatory before search<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Result of non-compliance<\/td><td>Search, seizure and prosecution become legally unsustainable<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-final-decision-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Final_Decision_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Final Decision of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court allowed the criminal petition. It quashed the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 22293\/2025, including the underlying charge sheet arising from Crime No. 88\/2025, pending on the file of the IX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioner was concerned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-point-of-law-settled\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Point_of_Law_Settled\"><\/span>Point of Law Settled<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This judgment reaffirms that allegations of selling counterfeit branded items constitute trademark offenses under Section 104 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, and cannot be routinely converted into copyright prosecutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It re-establishes that compliance with Section 115(4) of the Trademarks Act, 1999, specifically a search by an officer of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or above and a prior opinion from the Registrar, is mandatory. Any search, seizure, or prosecution conducted in violation of these mandatory safeguards is illegal and liable to be quashed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-legal-principles-reaffirmed\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Legal_Principles_Reaffirmed\"><\/span>Legal Principles Reaffirmed<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Counterfeit branded goods primarily attract the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Copyright Act, 1957, cannot be used to bypass mandatory safeguards under the Trade Marks Act.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Section 115(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, is mandatory.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Only a police officer of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or above can conduct the search.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A prior opinion of the Registrar of Trade Marks is compulsory before conducting the search.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Non-compliance renders the search, seizure, and prosecution liable to be quashed.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-case-details\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Details\"><\/span>Case Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Particular<\/th><th>Details<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Title of the Case<\/td><td>Sri Vishal Vrushabhanaath Samaje vs. The State of Karnataka and Another<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Date of Judgment<\/td><td>20.07.2026<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Case Number<\/td><td>Criminal Petition No. 9513 of 2026<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Neutral Citation<\/td><td>2026:KHC:37262<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Court<\/td><td>High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Honorable Judge<\/td><td>Honorable Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-key-takeaways\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Takeaways\"><\/span>Key Takeaways<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Court distinguished copyright infringement from trademark infringement.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Counterfeit brand label cases ordinarily fall under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Police authorities cannot avoid mandatory statutory safeguards by registering cases under the Copyright Act, 1957.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Failure to comply with Section 115(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, makes the prosecution legally unsustainable.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The judgment strengthens procedural safeguards in criminal investigations involving intellectual property offenses.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-written-by\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Written_By\"><\/span>Written By<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman<\/strong><br>IP Adjutor (Patent and Trademark Attorney)<br>High Court of Delhi<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/selling-counterfeit-goods-uae-law-legal-remedies\/\">Selling of Counterfeit Goods under the Label of the Original Product: Legal Remedies under UAE Law<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-vs-brand-protection\/\">Trademark vs. Brand Protection<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/expanding-territorial-jurisdiction-in-the-age-of-e-commerce\/\">Expanding Territorial Jurisdiction in the Age of E-Commerce<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/how-to-do-trademark-search\/\">How to do a trademark search?<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/uae-brand-protection-laws-trademark-copyright-ip-disputes\/\">Trademark, Copyright, and Commercial Brand Disputes in the UAE<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Important_Links\"><\/span>Important Links<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Important Links:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/lawyers\/lawyers_home.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Lawyers in India<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/copyright\/register.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Copyright Registration in India<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/articles\/index.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Caveat Filing in Supreme Court of India<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/helpline\/mutual_consent_divorce.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Mutual Consent Divorce in Delhi\/ <\/a>NCR: WhatsApp 9650499965<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Introduction The Karnataka High Court recently addressed a vital procedural and jurisdictional issue regarding intellectual property offenses in criminal law. The case centered on whether police authorities can bypass statutory procedures prescribed under specialized statutes by invoking provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957, for cases involving counterfeit trade mark goods. The ruling re-emphasizes the strict<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[5873],"tags":[5969],"class_list":["post-28519","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-trademark-law","tag-trademark-laws"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v28.1 (Yoast SEO v28.1) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\"},\"headline\":\"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1200,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Trademark Laws\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Trademark Laws\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/\",\"name\":\"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00\",\"description\":\"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Trademark Laws > Karnataka High Court Quashes Counterfeit Goods Prosecution for Violating Mandatory Trade Marks Act Procedure\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\",\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\"},\"description\":\"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/ajayamitabhsuman\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act","og_description":"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00","author":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/"},"author":{"name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305"},"headline":"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act","datePublished":"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/"},"wordCount":1200,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Trademark Laws"],"articleSection":["Trademark Laws"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/","name":"Karnataka High Court: Counterfeit Brand Cases Must Follow the Trademarks Act, Not Copyright Act - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-07-29T06:54:17+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-29T06:58:27+00:00","description":"Karnataka High Court rules counterfeit brand cases must follow the Trade Marks Act. Illegal searches under the Copyright Act are quashed.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/karnataka-high-court-counterfeit-brand-cases-must-follow-the-trademarks-act-not-copyright-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trademark Laws > Karnataka High Court Quashes Counterfeit Goods Prosecution for Violating Mandatory Trade Marks Act Procedure"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305","name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN"},"description":"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/ajayamitabhsuman\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28519","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28519"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28519\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":28695,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28519\/revisions\/28695"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}