The Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against Procter & Gamble (P&G) in a case involving allegations of cheating by using the patented idea of an Indian innovator for commercial exploitation.
The FIR of January 2024, lodged on a complaint by Rajiv Rai Sachdev, alleges that P&G invited him to collaborate by submitting a patented innovation as part of its “Connect + Develop Programme”.
Mr. Sachdev claims he shared a proprietary method of dyeing textiles using neem and holy basil extracts — a technology he had patented in India, the U.S., and Europe.
While P&G later expressed disinterest in a formal partnership, Mr Sachdev claimed the company went on to launch a product — Whisper Ultra Clean (with herbal oil) — allegedly using the technology submitted by Mr. Sachdev.
The innovator said he sent a cease-and-desist notice to the company on May 13, 2022, alleging infringement of his patent and trademark.
In response, P&G argued that the process used in their product was entirely different and did not infringe upon the patented method.
The multi-national company further contended that the product in question did not follow the innovator’s process and merely added herbal oil containing neem to the inner layers of sanitary napkins.
The company also said the innovator cannot claim a monopoly over the use of neem, which has been used in India for thousands of years.
It challenged a trial court order dated December 30, 2023, which had directed the police to register an FIR against the company. The trial court had also held that the allegations in the application showed that the accused had used the idea of the informant for commercial exploitation.
Before the high court, the counsel appearing for P&G emphasised that the allegations, at best, amounted to a civil dispute and that criminal proceedings were unwarranted.
“There can be no dispute with the proposition of law that the civil dispute cannot be turned into criminal proceedings, however, it does not mean that no civil action can give rise to a criminal action,” the high court noted.
The High Court further clarified that the availability of remedies under the Patent Act does not preclude recourse to criminal law in cases where fraudulent inducement and misappropriation are alleged.
While the company submitted that it never used the technology/process submitted by Mr. Sachdev, the high court said, “These are the questions of fact which require investigation”
“The allegations in the FIR, if believed to be correct, prima facie show the offence of cheating, and it is impermissible to quash the same. Therefore, the present petition fails, and the same is dismissed,” the high court said in its May 28 judgment.
Published – June 02, 2025 02:59 am IST
