ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED versus RAM BABU & ANOTHER

ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED versus RAM BABU & ANOTHER

The appellant-company is a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) CrPC and therefore entitled to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC; the proviso is a self-contained, standalone provision not circumscribed by Section 378, and the victim's right to appeal accrues when a court acquits the accused, with the appeal lying to the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of the court that acquitted (thus where acquittal occurred in the First Appellate Court, the victim's appeal lies to the High Court). The High Court's holding that the appellant was not a victim because it had not itself filed the complaint and therefore could not maintain the proviso...

Parties
Appellant: Asian Paints Limited; Respondent: Ram Babu; Respondent: State of Rajasthan Through P.P., Jaipur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dismissing Victim's Appeal Under Proviso to Section 372 Cr PC
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Victim, Appeal, Acquittal, Proviso to Section 372 Cr PC, Section 378 Cr PC, Maintainability, Power of Attorney, Counterfeit Goods
Criminal Procedure Intellectual Property Copyright Law Trademark Law Victim Appeal Acquittal Proviso to Section 372 Cr PC +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asian Paints Limited

Appellant

Ram Babu

Respondent

State of Rajasthan Through P.P., Jaipur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dismissing Victim's Appeal Under Proviso to Section 372 Cr PC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant-company falls under the definition of 'victim' in terms of Section 2(wa) read with the proviso to Section 372 CrPC
  2. 2 Whether Section 378 CrPC would prevail over the proviso to Section 372 CrPC in the facts
  3. 3 Whether an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC is restricted to an appeal to the First Appellate Court or includes an appeal to the High Court

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant-company is a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) CrPC and therefore entitled to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC; the proviso is a self-contained, standalone provision not circumscribed by Section 378, and the victim's right to appeal accrues when a court acquits the accused, with the appeal lying to the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of the court that acquitted (thus where acquittal occurred in the First Appellate Court, the victim's appeal lies to the High Court). The High Court's holding that the appellant was not a victim because it had not itself filed the complaint and therefore could not maintain the proviso...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 09.10.2023 of the High Court set aside
  • S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No.2354/2022 held maintainable and restored to its original file and number before the High Court