Jan Vishwas 2026: Trademark Counterfeiting Is Still a Crime — What the Two Decriminalisation Acts Actually Changed for IP Owners

The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026, Act No. 8 of 2026, received the President's assent on 7 April 2026 and its Schedule amends 80 enactments to replace imprisonment with monetary penalties for minor and technical offences. Because the 2023 Act of the same name did reach the Trade Marks Act, a belief has spread among traders that trademark offences are decriminalised and a counterfeiter now faces only a fine. That is wrong on both counts: the 2026 Act does not touch the Trade Marks Act, and the 2023 Act left the counterfeiting offences exactly as they were.

What the 2026 Act changes in intellectual property law

Two entries in the 2026 Act's Schedule concern IP, and neither is about trade marks. In the Copyright Act, 1957, section 67, which made false entries in the Register of Copyrights an offence punishable with up to a year's imprisonment, is omitted, with effect from 15 June 2026. In the Patents Act, 1970, section 119, the parallel offence of falsifying the Register of Patents, is omitted; the heading of Chapter XX changes from "Penalties" to "Punishments"; and a proviso to section 118 removes criminal liability for filing a patent abroad without permission where the Central Government considers the invention was not relevant to defence or atomic energy at the time. The patent amendments commenced on 1 June 2026.

What the 2023 Act changed in the Trade Marks Act

The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, Act No. 18 of 2023, amended the Trade Marks Act, 1999 with effect from 1 August 2024. Its changes were confined to the administrative offences:

• Section 107, falsely representing a trade mark as registered, for example using the ® symbol on an unregistered mark: imprisonment of up to three years replaced by a penalty of one-half per cent of total sales, turnover or gross receipts as per the audited accounts, or five lakh rupees, whichever is less.
• Section 106, the penalty for removing piece goods, cotton yarn or thread contrary to section 81: omitted.
• Sections 108 and 109, falsely representing a place of business as connected with the Trade Marks Office, and falsification of entries in the register: omitted.
• New sections 112A and 112B: an officer authorised by the Registrar holds the inquiry and imposes the penalty after a hearing; an appeal lies within sixty days to an officer one rank higher, decided within sixty days. Failing to comply with either order within ninety days is punishable with a fine of one lakh rupees or up to a year's imprisonment, or both.
• Section 140(3): an importer who fails to supply information about imported goods bearing false marks is liable to a penalty of ten thousand rupees, levied under the Customs Act.

What a counterfeiter still faces

Sections 103, 104 and 105 of the Trade Marks Act were not amended by either Act. Applying a false trade mark or false trade description to goods or services (section 103), and selling, letting for hire or exposing for sale goods or services to which a false trade mark has been applied (section 104), remain punishable with imprisonment of not less than six months and up to three years and a fine of not less than fifty thousand rupees and up to two lakh rupees. A second or subsequent conviction under section 105 carries not less than one year and up to three years' imprisonment and a fine of not less than one lakh and up to two lakh rupees. Under section 115(3) these offences are cognizable, and section 115(4) lets a police officer of at least Deputy Superintendent rank search and seize once the Registrar's opinion on the mark has been obtained. The Geographical Indications Act got the same treatment in 2023: section 42(2) became a penalty, sections 43 and 44 were omitted, sections 37A and 37B added adjudication, and the counterfeiting offences in sections 39 to 41 stayed criminal.

What brand owners should take from this

1. The criminal complaint and police raid remain available against counterfeiters, with the Registrar's opinion under section 115(4) as the gateway; a reply that says the offence has been decriminalised is simply wrong.
2. Civil remedies under sections 134 and 135, injunction, damages or an account of profits and delivery up, are unaffected and remain the faster route in most commercial courts.
3. The ® symbol on an unregistered mark is now a penalty matter rather than a prosecution, but the penalty is measured against turnover from the audited accounts; a pending application is not a registration.
4. Customs recordation under the IPR (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 works alongside section 140; the importer's ten-thousand-rupee penalty for silence is the new lever at the port.
5. Both Acts carry the same escalator: fines and penalties in each Schedule rise by ten per cent of the minimum every three years from commencement, so the amounts above are floors that will move.

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources

Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2026 (No. 8 of 2026), Gazette of India, 8 April 2026, Schedule entries for the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Patents Act, 1970, and section 3; Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 (No. 18 of 2023), Schedule entries for the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Geographical Indications Act, 1999, commenced for IP laws on 1 August 2024; Trade Marks Act, 1999, sections 103 to 105, 115, 134 and 135; 2026 commencement dates as reported by LexOrbis.

BookMyTM files trademark applications, oppositions and infringement notices across Kerala and India, and advises on the criminal, civil and customs routes against counterfeits.