INDIA: Supreme Court Confirms Victim’s Right to Appeal Acquittals in IP Crimes

In clarifying the rights of intellectual property (IP) owners, the Supreme Court of India has held that a company qualifies as a “victim” and possesses an independent statutory right to appeal an order of acquittal in a criminal case.

In its ruling of July 14, 2025, in Asian Paints Limited v. Ram Babu & Another (2025 INSC 828, Criminal Appeal arising from Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9888 of 2024), the Supreme Court held, that the right to appeal an acquittal, granted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), is a self-contained provision. This right is not restricted by the procedural requirements for appeals filed by the State under Section 378 of the CrPC.

The case arose after Asian Paints Limited initiated action against the proprietor of Ganpati Traders for allegedly selling counterfeit paint products. A First Information Report (FIR) was registered under sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for cheating, and under the Copyright Act, 1957 for copyright infringement.

The trial court convicted the accused, but the First Appellate Court subsequently acquitted him. Asian Paints, as the aggrieved party, filed an appeal against the acquittal before the Rajasthan High Court under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding it was not maintainable on the grounds that Asian Paints was not the direct complainant and therefore could not be considered a “victim” with the right to appeal under the provision.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order, holding that the appeal was maintainable. The Court established that a company is a “person” that can be a “victim” under Section 2(wa) of the CrPC if it has suffered “loss or injury,” which includes the reputational and financial harm caused by counterfeiting.

The judgment emphasized that a “victim” is distinct from a “complainant,” and a victim’s right to appeal is not dependent on having filed the initial complaint. Critically, the Court held that the proviso to Section 372 is a “stand-alone Section” that confers a substantive right on the victim to appeal “any order” of acquittal, including one from a First Appellate Court. Such an appeal lies to the next court in the judicial hierarchy and does not require the special leave mandated for appeals under Section 378.

This ruling strengthens the criminal enforcement route for IP protection in India. It confirms that corporate brand owners, as victims of infringement and counterfeiting, have a direct and independent right to challenge an acquittal in criminal proceedings. This empowers IP owners to pursue cases to their conclusion without being solely dependent on the State’s apparatus to file an appeal, providing a more robust mechanism for protecting their rights.

Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of this article, readers are urged to check independently on matters of specific concern or interest. Law & Practice updates are published without comment from INTA except where it has taken an official position.

© 2025 International Trademark Association