Case Title: Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Ltd. & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.:Date of Order: 28 May 2025: Case Number: Cr. MMO No. 266 of 2024: Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:16349:Name of Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla:Name of Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Very Brief Facts:The informant claimed to have developed and patented a method of dyeing textiles using herbal extracts like neem and holy basil. He submitted his technology to Procter & Gamble (P&G) through their Connect + Develop program. Later, P&G launched a sanitary napkin product allegedly using the submitted herbal formulation. The informant filed a criminal complaint alleging misuse of his patented technology.
Dispute:The central issue was whether the FIR, registered pursuant to a Magistrate's direction under Section 156(3) CrPC, should be quashed. P&G argued that the allegations were purely civil in nature (related to patent infringement), no criminal intent was present, and that no confidentiality or contractual relationship existed between the parties. The complaint, they contended, was an abuse of the criminal justice process.
Discussion by Judge:The Court considered whether the ingredients of cheating and criminal breach of trust under Sections 415, 420, and 405 IPC were made out. It concluded that both offences could not co-exist as they require distinct intent, and neither was satisfied here. The Judge emphasized that patent infringement is a civil issue, and the FIR lacked sufficient basis to constitute a criminal offence. The criminal complaint was seen as an attempt to harass and pressurize the petitioners in a civil dispute.
Decision:The High Court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings, holding that the allegations did not disclose any cognizable offence. It ruled the proceedings amounted to an abuse of process and interfered under Section 482 CrPC.
