Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against MakeMyTrip Officials in Trademark Infringement Case — Domain Name Dispute Lacks Criminal Intent. Court holds that mere registration of similar domain names without evidence of dishonest intention does not constitute criminal offence under Sections 63, 103, 104 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 96
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves three criminal applications filed by Rajesh Dalal (Vice President), Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., and Deep Kalra (CEO) seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated by Ezeego One Travels & Tours Ltd. for alleged trademark infringement. The complainant alleged that the applicants registered domain names similar to its trademark 'Ezeego1', thereby committing offences under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Bombay High Court analyzed the complaint and found that there was no allegation of dishonest intention on the part of the applicants. The court held that the essential ingredients of criminal offences under Sections 63, 103, and 104 of the Trade Marks Act were not made out. The court emphasized that domain name disputes are essentially civil in nature and that criminal proceedings should not be used as a tool for harassment. Consequently, the court quashed the criminal proceedings against all applicants.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Dishonest Intention - Trade Marks Act, 1999, Sections 63, 103, 104 - The court examined whether criminal proceedings for trademark infringement by domain name registration can be sustained without evidence of dishonest intention - Held that mere registration of similar domain names without dishonest intention does not constitute criminal offence; civil remedy is more appropriate (Paras 1-18).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether criminal proceedings for alleged trademark infringement by registration of similar domain names can be sustained against directors and officers of a company in the absence of dishonest intention.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the applications and quashed the criminal proceedings against all applicants.

Law Points

  • Criminal proceedings for trademark infringement require dishonest intention
  • Civil remedy is more appropriate for domain name disputes
  • Quashing under Section 482 CrPC is warranted when complaint lacks essential ingredients of offence
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (08) 94

Criminal Application No. 313 of 2017, Criminal Application No. 314 of 2017, Criminal Application No. 315 of 2017

2019-08-16

S. S. Shinde, J

Mr. Alankar Kirpekar a/w J. George i/b MAG Legal for the Applicants, Mr. Mihir Gheewala i/b Aditya Mehta for Respondent No.2, Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent/State

Rajesh Dalal, Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., Deep Kalra

The State of Maharashtra, Ezeego One Travels & Tours Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal applications for quashing of proceedings for trademark infringement

Remedy Sought

Quashing of criminal complaint and proceedings under Section 482 CrPC

Filing Reason

Alleged infringement of trademark 'Ezeego1' by registration of similar domain names

Issues

Whether the criminal complaint discloses essential ingredients of offences under Sections 63, 103, 104 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 Whether criminal proceedings can be sustained in the absence of dishonest intention

Submissions/Arguments

Applicants argued that there is no dishonest intention and the dispute is civil in nature Respondent argued that registration of similar domain names amounts to criminal infringement

Ratio Decidendi

Criminal proceedings for trademark infringement require dishonest intention; mere registration of similar domain names without such intention does not constitute a criminal offence; civil remedy is more appropriate.

Judgment Excerpts

The applicants are the original accused. Brief facts leading to filing of the present application are as under: The complainant M/s. Ezeego one Travels & Tours Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956.

Acts & Sections

  • Trade Marks Act, 1999: 63, 103, 104
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 482
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against MakeMyTrip Officials in Trademark Infringement Case — Domain Name Dispute Lacks Criminal Intent. Court holds that mere registration of similar domain names without evidence of dishonest intenti...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Landlords' Writ Petition in Rent Eviction Case, Upholding Restoration of Suit for Merits Hearing. Service of Summons Was Defective as Made on Wrong Address and to Incorrect Person, and Tenant Deposited Arrears of...