STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH versus NAGOTIVENKATARAMANA

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 812 · Decided: 20-08-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
v. 
NAGOTIVENKATARAMANA 
AUGUST 20, 1996 
[K RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
Copyright Act, 1957: Sections 2(m) (ii), 3, 4, 44, 48, 51, 52-A and 63. 
Copyiight-Video shop-Respondent keeping vaiious cassettes of 
Telugu English and Hindi cinematograph films for hire and sale to 
pub/ic---Cassettes not containing the particular envisaged under Section 52-A 
of the Act-Charge for offence under Section 52-A read with Section 63---Gon-
victio1t-:Trial Court imposing sentence of six months and fine of Rs. 
3, 000-Affimzation of conviction and sentence by Appellate Court-Acquittal 
D by High Court-Appeal refen-ed by State-Held the offence would fall under 
Section 68-A-lllstead of imposillg a sentence of impiisonment, sentence of 
fine of a sum of R.s. 10,000 would meet the ends of justice-Absence of 
particulars on video films as mandated under Section 52-A constitutes infr-
ingement of copylight-ldentiftcation of the owner of the Copy1ight is not a 
E 
F 
pre-condition for violation of Section 63 or 68-A-Object of amending the 
copy1ight Act explained. 
Cinematograph Act, 1952 
Section 2(c)(d) Video film is a 
cinematograph. 
Ba/winder Singh v. Delhi Administration, AIR (1984) Del. 379, referred 
to. 
Interpretation of Statutes-Penal provisions-Interpretation and con-
struction of 
G 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1644-45 of 1996. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.9.90 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in Cr!. R.P. No. 665/89 and Cr!. R.C. No. 666 of 1989. 
H 
G. Prabhakar for the Appellant. 
812 
, ... 
STATEv. N. VENKATARAMANA 
813 
D. Prakash Reddy for Mrs. Rani Chhabra for the Respondent. 
A 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
Shri Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent has raised B . 
an interesting .question, of law in this case. The admittep facts are that the 
Inspector of Police, Urban Police ·Station, Tena!~ Guntur District of 
Andhra Pradesh had in a raid on December 23, 1986 seized 90 cassettes 
of various cinematograph films in Telugu, Hindi and English under a 
panchnama attested by PW-2 from the video library belonging to the C 
respondent and laid the charge-sheet for an offence under Section 52-A 
read with Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (for short, the "Act") as 
amended in 1984. The Trial Court after adduction of evidence of PWs-1 
to 3 and production of Exs. P-1 and M0-1 convicted the respondent under 
Section 63 of the Act for minimum sentence of six months and also 
imposed a fine of Rs. 3,000. In default, he was directed to undergo simple D 
imprisonment for a further period of one month. On appeal, the Sessions 
Judge, Guntur confirmed the same. In Criminal Revision No. 665/89 and 
CRC No. 666/89 the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by judgment dated 
September 17, 1990 acquitted the respondent of the offence. Thus these 
appeals by special leave. 
E 
The facts as found and not in dispute are that the respondent had 
kept in his shop by name Video City, various cassettes numbering 90 in 
Telugu, English and Hindu cinematograph films exhibiting the same either 
for hire or sale to the customers. The question, therefore, is : whether the 
respondent has committed infringement of a copy right or deemed infr-
F 
ingement thereof. The Statement of Objects and Reasons to Amendment 
Act 65 of 1984 reads as under : 
"Piracy has become a global problem due to the rapid advances in 
technology. It has assumed alarming proportions all over the world G 
and all the countries are trying to meet the challenge by taking 
stringent legislative and enforcement measures. The problem of 
piracy and the necessity for taking sufficient anti-piracy measures 
were also voiced by Members of Parliament at the time of the 
consideration of the Bill to amend the Copyright Act, 1957, last 
year, 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
814 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
2. Mainly there are three types of piracy, namely, piracy of the 
printed word, piracy of sound recordings and piracy of 
cinematograph films. The object of the pirate in all such cases is 
to make quick money and avoid payment of legitimate taxes and 
royalties. In respect 'of books, it is estimated that four hundred to 
five hundred titles are pirated every year in India and on each of 
the pirated titles, the loss to the Government in the form of tax 
evasion amounts approximately to Rs. 11,0UO. Apart from books, 
recorded music and video cassett

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.