JUDGMENT
Bhattacharya, J.
1. This is an appeal by the State against an order of acquittal passed by Presidency Magistrate.
2. The accused was charged under Sections 482, 485 and 486 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 6 and 7 of the Indian Merchandise Marks Act inter alia for infringement of trade mark rights of Messrs. Lever Brothers (India) Ltd., in respect of soap known as “Rexona”.
3. The learned Magistrate held that the word “Rexona” was registered under the Trade Marks Act. A label with certain marks shown in the certificate of registration (Ext. 13) was also found to have been protected by registration, But the Magistrate held that Lever Brothers (India) Ltd., had no trade mark right in respect of the wrappers of “Rexona”.
4. The marks in the label as shown in Ext. 13 are distinctly different from those in the wrappers of “Rexona”. There, is no indication on the wrappers themselves that “Rexona” was the property of Messrs. Lever Brothers (India) Ltd. A purchaser would not open the wrappers before completing his purchase. He would look at the wrappers. There may be some outward similarity in regard to the colour of the wrappers and the general type of the printing used. But, in the circumstances, till the wrappers are opened it will not be possible for any one to see the deception, if any, in reference to the lable. In the present case no evidence was given that any purchaser was likely to be deceived by the wrappers in question. The marks shown in Ext. 13 do not appear on the wrappers of the soap “Rihana”, which was being manufactured by the accused.
5. In the circumstances, the learned Magistrate, in our opinion, was justified in dismissing the case. We see no reason to differ. There is no grave or
compelling reason to interfere with the order of the learned Magistrate.
6. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed and the accused-respondent is discharged from his bail bond.
Guha Ray, J.
7. I agree.
