w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Max Zipper v/s State

    Criminal Revision No. 144 of 1991
    Decided On, 25 August 1995
    At, High Court of Delhi
    For the Petitioner: T.P. Gang Advocate. For the Respondents: Manmohan Singh Advocate.

Judgment Text
Crl. R. 144/91

1. This is an application for the return of the goods seized in a raid in prosecution initiated under Trade & Merchandise Marks Act.

2. I have heard the parties. In the present case on filing the complaint certain searches and seizures were carried out whereby certain alleged, spurious goods whereon false trade marks were being imposed by the accused petitioner were seized. The case is still before the trial court and even summons are yet to be issued. The goods which were seized have to be tendered in evidence to establish the alleged illegal activities of the accused, the petitioner in the present case. It cannot be said that these goods will not be required by the trial court at the time of evidence or are not to be used as evidence against the accused. As such there cannot be any question of any such application being enter

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
tained at this stage. 3. The petition is pre-mature and is, therefore, dismissed.