Criminal Misc.-M No. 23791 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 23791 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.9.2011 Mahesh Chander and others .. Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K. S. Pannu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Rishabh Mahajan, Advocate for the complainant. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even if the entire allegations in the FIR are taken to be true, at the most it could be an offence under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (for short, `the Act'), in terms of which search of any premises could be carried out by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and that too with prior approval of the Registrar under the Act. In the present case, search was conducted by Sub Inspector of Police. He further submitted that offence under Section 420 IPC is not made out as there is no complaint by any person that he has been cheated. Referring to a judgment of this court in Satpal and another v. State of Punjab and others, 2011(1) RCR (Criminal) 281, the submission is that on account of violation of the aforesaid mandatory provisions of the Act, even the FIR was quashed by this court. Learned counsel for the State as well as the complainant submitted that certain raw material as well as semi-finished goods along with wooden dyes and stickers were recovered from the spot, which shows that the petitioners were carrying on illegal activities. However, it is not disputed that there is no complaint by any person that he has been cheated. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering Criminal Misc.-M No. 23791 of 2011 [2] the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, the petitioners are not required to be taken into custody for interrogation. They are directed to appear before Investigating Officer on 16.9.2011 at 10.00 AM for joining investigation. In case of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for further investigation. They shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 7.9.2011 mk