JUDGMENT Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.
1. The present writ petition is directed for quashing the F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No. 317 of 2001 police station Transport Nagar, Meerut against the petitioners by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, respondent No. 2 under Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act. 1978 and Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957.
2. According to the allegations of the first information report the complainant had received information from the District Magistrate, Meerut, that he had received complaint that M/s, Vidya Prakashan Kendra Ltd. Meerut, is publishing books for which they have no permission from the Department. Additional City Magistrate, Meerut, had raided the godown of the publisher and seized the following books :
1. Sanskrit Parichayika--Class 9
2. Sanskrit Parichaylka--Class 10
3. Intermediate English Prose
4. Intermediate English Poetry
5. Rang Bharti
3. It is alleged that publication of these books was unauthorised as they were not allotted for publication of these books and on the said allegations, a report was registered against the petitioners under the aforesaid sections.
4. We have heard Sri R. K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Arvind Tewari, Government Advocate.
5. A perusal of the F.I.R. indicates that the main allegations against the petitioners are that they have violated the provisions of Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of U. P. Course Books Act, 1978 and Section 63 of Copyright Act. Sections 3. 4, 7 and 8 of U. P. Course Books Act provides as under :
"3. Dealer not to withhold from sale or charge excess price.-
(1) No dealer shall :
la) withhold from sale any course book held in stock by him ; or
(b) charge for any course book a price which exceeds its notified price ;
(2) No publisher shall, subsequent to the commencement of this Act, use any paper other than concessional rate paper for the printing or publishing of text book :
(a) prescribed or recommended for use in any class by the Board or by the Department of Education, as the case may be :
(b) written according to the syllabus in respect of the subject for which the Board has not recommended or approved any book :
Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall be deemed to require a publisher to use concessional rate paper for the printing or publishing of any book referred to above if concessional rate paper cannot be made available to him for any reason.
4. Requisition of stock of course books.--(1) Where the Prescribed Authority has reason to believe that any dealer has stored or continued to store or acquired for storage, whether on his own account or on account of or in partnership with, any other person, any course books, the Prescribed Authority may, by order, require, him to sell at the notified price the whole or a specified part of such stock to the State Government or to such person or class of persons and In such manner and within such time as it may specify in this behalf.
(2) Where any person against whom an order is passed under Sub-section (1), fails to comply with it, the Prescribed Authority may take, or cause to be taken such stock of course books or part thereof, as the case may be in its custody, and may deliver or cause to be delivered such stock or part thereof to the State Government or such person or class of persons as may have been specified in the order, and may cause to be paid to the dealer the notified price thereof.
7. Power of State Government of notify prices of course books.--The State Government may by notified orders fix fair prices of course books specified or referred to therein.
8. Penalties.--If any person contravenes the provisions of Section 3, he shall be punishable :
(i) in the case of contravention of Sub-section (1) of that section with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and shall also be liable to fine, and
(ii) in the cases of any other contravention, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine."
6. A perusal of Sections 3. 4, 7 and 8 of Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act, 1978, shows that under Section 8. violation of Section 3 has been made punishable and Sections 4 and 7 which are mentioned in the F.I.R. are not penal provisions. The allegations in the F.I.R. against the petitioners are that they had published course books referred in the F.I.R. without any authority and without any permission from the Department. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that no such authority or sanction is required under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act. 1978. The only restriction placed under Section 3 of the Act is that no dealer shall withhold the sale of any course books held In stock by him or charge any course books price which exceeds its notified price. A perusal of the F.I.R. indicates that there Is no such allegation in the F.I.R. that petitioners are charging any price exceeding the price which is notified nor there is any allegation that the course books are printed on concessional rate paper. The counsel for the petitioners has rightly argued that the price of the course books in question have not been notified by the State Government under Section 7 of the Act, hence there can be no question of violation of Section 3 of the Act. Similarly, there is no allegation that petitioners had withheld the sale of any course books in his stock. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioners had not published any book on concessional rate paper as mentioned in the Act. Therefore, the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act, are not applicable against the petitioners.
7. The learned counsel for the State did not dispute that the petitioners were not allotted any concessional rate paper by the State or by the Central Government. We are of the opinion that the impugned first Information report does not state any violation of any of the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act, 1978. The State Government had not notified the price of the books under Section 7 of the Act. There is no allegation that petitioners had withheld the sale of the book or any concessional rate paper was used for publishing the books. The petitioners have thus not violated any of the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act, 1978.
8. The other allegation in the F.I.R. is regarding violation of Section 63 of Copyright Act which reads as under :
"63. Offence of infringement of copyright or other rights conferred by this Act.--Any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of :
(a) the copyright in a work ;
or
(b) any other right conferred by this Act (except the right conferred by Section 53A), shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to two lacs rupees :
Provided that (where the infringement has not been made for gain in the course of trade or business), the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment. Impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months or a fine of less than fifty thousand rupees.
Explanation.--Construction of a building or other structure which infringes or which, if completed, would infringe the copyright in some other work shall not be an offence under this section."
9. As regards the violation of Section 63 of the Copyright Act, the contention of the petitioners' counsel is that course books published by the petitioners are not "Government work" within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Act. The course books are published according to the syllabi of the Department of Education of Uttar Pradesh. The Course Books Act. 1978, puts restriction on printing of text books by recognised publisher only with regard to the students of class 1 to 8. These books are published under the authority and control of the Government and they are Government Work within the meaning of Section 2(k) of Copyright Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners' further submitted that the petitioners had not published any book for the students of class 1 to 8. The books which are published by the petitioners are according to the syllabi of the Department and they are not published under the authority or control of the Government. The reliance was placed by learned counsel for the petitioners' in a case of Wag Book House and another v. State of West Bengal and Ors., AIR 1982 Cal 245 :
In this case it was observed :
"The guidelines for the authors and publishers of text books issued by the Board of Secondary Education, West Bengal annexed as Annexure-A to the petition prescribing the syllabus cannot be taken as original work being the product of labour, skill and capital of some men engaged by the Board. The syllabi merely prescribing the guidelines which are to be followed by the text books writers cannot be termed as an original work having some quality or character of its own different from the raw material used. Therefore, in my opinion, the syllabi that has been prescribed by the Board being not a product of labour, skill and capital and not having an independent character and quality of its own the question of any copyright does not arise from this. The submission of the learned standing counsel that in accordance with the syllabi the text books prepared by the petitioners is an infringement of the copyright is without any merit and hence the same is overruled."
10. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and, in our opinion. petitioners have not violated any of provisions of Copyright Act as the books published by the petitioners are for the students of Class IX and X and these books were published only according to the syllabus prescribed by the Board and there is no violation of any of the provisions of Copyright Act. Thus, the impugned first information report does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence against the petitioners and is liable to be quashed.
11. In the result the writ petition is allowed. The impugned F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No. 317 of 2001 police station Transport Nagar, Meerut and further proceedings on the basis of the impugned first information report against the petitioners are hereby quashed. The books seized by the opposite parties shall be returned to the petitioners forthwith.