Sold Spurious or Fake Goods: Consumer Forum vs Police Case

The Bottle That Looked Genuine

Your father takes a popular brand of blood-pressure medicine. You buy it from the same chemist for years. One Tuesday evening the chemist runs out, says he can give a fresh strip from a different distributor, and you take it. By Sunday your father's blood pressure has shot up. He has stopped responding to a tablet that has worked fine for ten years. You take the strip back, hold it next to the older one — the printing on the new strip is slightly blurred, the batch code does not match the company's website checker, the holographic strip is missing. You have been sold a fake.

This kind of story is more common than most people think. Fake cosmetics, fake medicines, counterfeit phone chargers, "Adidas" shoes from an unknown factory, bottled water with re-stuck labels, "branded" school bags whose stitching gives way in a week. Indian consumer law has a specific name for this category. It calls these "spurious goods". And it gives you not one but two parallel remedies — a civil consumer-forum case and a criminal FIR — that can run at the same time without one cancelling out the other.

The decision is no longer "police OR consumer forum". It is "how to use both, in what order, and for what end". This blog walks through both routes in plain language, explains where the law sits, and helps you pick the right combination for your specific situation.

What the Law Calls Spurious Goods

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 defines spurious goods in a single, clean line. Section 2(43) says: "spurious goods means such goods which are falsely claimed to be genuine". That is the whole definition. If a product is being passed off as something it is not — wrong manufacturer, wrong brand, wrong contents — it is spurious within the meaning of the Act.

"'Spurious goods' means such goods which are falsely claimed to be genuine." — Section 2(43), Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

This is wider than "counterfeit" in trademark law. A pack of paracetamol that contains chalk powder is spurious. A jar of "honey" that turns out to be sugar syrup is spurious. A "Samsung" charger made in an unlicensed workshop is spurious. An "Apollo" branded medicine repackaged by someone unrelated to the company is spurious.

The Act treats spurious goods seriously enough that it touches them in three different places. First, the definition itself in Section 2(43). Second, the offences chapter — Section 91 punishes the manufacture, sale, storage, distribution or import of spurious goods. Third, the unfair trade practice net under Section 2(47)(vi) includes "manufacturing of spurious goods or offering such goods for sale or adopting deceptive practices in the provision of services". So spurious-goods conduct is hit by both the civil and the criminal sides of the Act, and that is before you even get to the police FIR route under the criminal code.

The Two Roads: Civil or Criminal?

When a buyer in India is sold a fake, there are essentially two doors. They are very different in mood, speed, and outcome.

Door one is the consumer forum. You file a complaint as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The opposite parties are the seller and (where you can show the chain) the manufacturer and the distributor. The forum can order refund, replacement, compensation for loss or injury, compensation for mental agony, punitive damages, and corrective advertisements. The money comes to you. The proceedings are documentary, the lawyer fees are modest, and the time to a final order is typically months rather than years if the file is clean.

Door two is the police station. You file a First Information Report alleging cheating, fraud, or sale of spurious goods. The accused are investigated, can be arrested, and the matter goes to the criminal court for trial. No money flows to you directly. What flows is the threat of imprisonment to the cheater, and the public record of a criminal complaint that often jolts a company into a settlement that the consumer forum alone could not extract.

Indian courts have repeatedly clarified that the two are not mutually exclusive. The same set of facts can give rise to a civil dispute (defective goods, breach of contract, unfair trade practice) and a criminal offence (cheating, sale of spurious goods, food adulteration). You can choose either, or both. The right strategy depends on how serious the harm is, how organised the cheater is, and how patient you are.

Consumer Forum Route: Section 35

For the consumer forum, the relevant gateway provision is Section 35 of the Act. It says, in essence, that a complaint may be filed by a consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered, or such service is provided or agreed to be provided. The complaint can also be filed by a registered voluntary consumer association, the Central or State Government, or the CCPA. You file the complaint with the District Commission if your claim is up to fifty lakh rupees, the State Commission if above fifty lakh up to two crore, and the National Commission above two crore.

For a spurious-goods case, the complaint typically includes the following heads of relief:

• Refund of the price of the spurious product.
• Replacement with a genuine product, if you want one.
• Compensation for loss or injury — medical bills if a fake medicine harmed you, repair costs if a fake charger damaged your phone, etc.
• Compensation for mental agony and harassment.
• Punitive damages under the proviso to Section 39, where the conduct is wilful or repeated.
• Corrective advertisement at the cost of the opposite party under Section 39(1)(k), where misleading advertising was part of the fraud.
• Litigation costs.

The proof you need is straightforward — the invoice, the product itself (including the packaging), photographs of the difference between genuine and fake, a lab test report if you can get one, and your medical or repair records. Many spurious-product cases now also rely on the manufacturer's own anti-counterfeit verification tools (QR codes, holographic strips, SMS verification numbers). A screenshot showing the brand's own portal saying "code not found" is powerful evidence.

Where the harm is patterned — many buyers, same brand, same fake supplier — your complaint can also flag the matter for parallel CCPA action. The CCPA has investigation and recall powers that an individual consumer court does not. Read more on how to make the CCPA investigate a wider product fraud if you suspect the fake is being sold to thousands of people.

Police FIR Route: Cheating and Spurious Goods

The police route runs through the criminal procedure code. Under the old framework it was the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Under the new framework (in force from 1 July 2024) it is the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The structure is the same. Information of a cognizable offence is given orally or in writing to the officer-in-charge of a police station; the information must be reduced to writing, read over to the informant, signed, and entered in the FIR register.

The first information report is, in the language of one of the leading cases on the point, "the earliest information given to the Police which sets the investigation in motion". The very purpose of the FIR is "to obtain early information about an alleged criminal act and to record the circumstances before there is time for them to be forgotten or embellished". If the information relates to a cognizable offence (and most spurious-goods offences are cognizable in their serious forms), the police can start investigation immediately without a magistrate's order.

For a buyer cheated by spurious goods, the criminal heads typically pleaded in the FIR are:

• Cheating — defined in Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (now Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023). The essence is that the accused dishonestly induced the buyer to part with property (money) by deceiving him about the nature or genuineness of the product.
• Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property — Section 420 IPC (now Section 318(4) BNS), the more serious form with imprisonment up to seven years and fine.
• Adulteration / sale of spurious drugs or food under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act or the Food Safety and Standards Act, where applicable.
• Trademark offences under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 where a registered brand has been counterfeited.
• Spurious goods offences under Section 91 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — covered separately in the next section because it is the most directly relevant.

The classic Supreme Court line on cheating is that "the dishonest intention" must exist "right at the beginning of the transaction". For a spurious-goods sale, this is usually easy to establish — nobody manufactures fake medicine by accident. The case Hridaya Ranjan Pd. Verma v State of Bihar, AIR 2000 and several others have laid down that cheating requires a fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction. The fact that the product itself was fake from the start is the strongest possible evidence of that intention.

Section 91 CP Act: The Criminal Edge

A provision that not many ordinary buyers know about, but every consumer lawyer should, is Section 91 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It creates a specific criminal offence for spurious goods, with punishment graded by the harm caused.

The provision punishes anyone who, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, manufactures for sale or stores or sells or distributes or imports any spurious goods. The punishments are:

• If the act causes injury not amounting to grievous hurt to the consumer — imprisonment up to one year and fine up to three lakh rupees.
• If the act causes injury resulting in grievous hurt — imprisonment up to seven years and fine up to five lakh rupees.
• If the act results in the death of a consumer — imprisonment not less than seven years, which may extend to imprisonment for life, and fine not less than ten lakh rupees.

The Act says clearly that offences under clauses (b) and (c) — grievous hurt and death — are cognizable and non-bailable. That means the police can arrest without a warrant and the accused cannot get bail as a matter of right; bail has to be applied for and considered by the court. The court can also suspend or cancel any licence held by the offender. Section 90 creates a parallel and equally strong offence for products containing an adulterant, with the same graded punishment ladder.

Why does this matter for an ordinary buyer? Because Section 91 lets you frame the criminal complaint not just under the general cheating law but under a specific consumer-protection offence. A complaint that cites Section 91 of the CP Act 2019 alongside Section 318 BNS / 420 IPC gives the investigating officer a clearer statutory hook, and signals to the accused that you and your lawyer have read the new Act carefully. In serious-harm cases — fake medicine that hospitalised someone, a fake cosmetic that caused chemical burns — Section 91 is the centre of gravity of the criminal complaint.

Which Route First? A Practical Comparison

If both routes are available, which one should you use? In practice the answer depends on what you want most.

If you want your money back fast, go to the consumer forum first. The civil forum is faster on individual remedies. A criminal trial can drag on for years before anything tangible reaches you.

If you have been physically harmed — hospital admission, allergic reaction, child fell ill from fake medicine — file the FIR first. Section 91(2) of the CP Act makes serious-harm spurious-goods offences cognizable and non-bailable; the police are duty-bound to register the FIR and investigate. The consumer forum case follows.

If a major brand is being faked at scale, both routes plus a CCPA complaint should run in parallel. The CCPA can drive a recall under Section 20 of the CP Act, the consumer forum gives you personal damages, and the FIR puts the cheater under criminal jeopardy.

If you want to extract a strong out-of-court settlement, the FIR is often the more powerful pressure. Many companies that ignore consumer notices respond very quickly once an FIR is registered, because the reputational cost of a criminal investigation is high. A consumer lawyer can balance the two without crossing into the territory of criminal threat.

One important reminder. Filing a false FIR is itself an offence. The cheating route works when the facts genuinely support it — there has to be dishonest intention from the beginning. A bona fide quality defect, without the element of fake or spurious product, is a civil matter only. If your complaint overlaps with broader cheating and fraud questions, a short consultation with a criminal lawyer is worth the time.

What Should I Actually Do Now?

If you have just discovered that something you bought is a fake, here is a practical roadmap before you decide which door to knock on.

1. Preserve the product itself. Do not throw away the packaging, the strip, the box, the holographic stickers, the batch code, the bill. The product is the evidence.
2. Photograph everything. Side-by-side photographs of a genuine product (borrow one from a neighbour or friend) and the fake one. Close-ups of fonts, holograms, batch codes, expiry dates.
3. Use the brand's anti-counterfeit tools. Many brands now have a verification number to SMS, a QR code to scan, or a website to enter the code. A screenshot showing "code invalid" or "not found" is powerful evidence.
4. Visit the seller and get a written response. Ask the seller in writing where the product came from. Most chemists, shops, and online sellers will issue a defensive note. That note is useful for both the consumer complaint and the FIR.
5. Get a lab report if injury is involved. Approved labs can test medicines, cosmetics, food samples, and many other products. The lab report shows the gap between the product and what it claimed to be.
6. Send a written legal notice to the seller and the brand owner, asking for refund, replacement, and compensation. Give 15 days. For drafting pointers, see how to draft strong legal notices and consumer demand letters.
7. File the FIR if there is physical harm or organised fraud. Walk into the local police station, give a written complaint citing Section 318 / Section 420 and Section 91 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. If the police refuses to register the FIR, escalate to the Superintendent of Police or move the Magistrate under Section 175 BNSS (formerly Section 156(3) CrPC).
8. File the consumer complaint at the appropriate Commission. District up to Rs. 50 lakh, State above 50 lakh up to 2 crore, National above 2 crore. Use the heads of relief listed earlier in this blog.
9. Send a parallel complaint to the CCPA if the fake is being sold widely. The CCPA can investigate suo motu and order recall.
10. Talk to a consumer lawyer for high-stakes cases. Fake medicine cases, fake food cases, and brand-counterfeit cases benefit enormously from professional drafting, because the same set of facts has to be presented in slightly different ways to the police, the consumer forum, and the CCPA. A coordinated strategy saves time and produces stronger outcomes.

Two Laws, One Goal — Justice for the Buyer

India's spurious-goods problem is older than the Consumer Protection Act itself. What is new is that the law has finally given the buyer both a civil shield and a criminal sword to deal with it. Section 2(43) defines the product. Section 35 lets you complain. Section 39 lets the consumer forum order refund, replacement, compensation, punitive damages, and corrective advertising. Section 91 lets the criminal court send the cheater to jail. The BNSS lets the police investigate. The CCPA can recall the product entirely.

At Pinaka Legal, our consumer rights team frequently handles cases where buyers have been sold fake medicines, fake cosmetics, fake electronics, or counterfeit branded goods. The right answer is rarely "police only" or "consumer forum only". It is almost always a calibrated combination — fast civil action for refund and damages, parallel criminal action where the conduct demands it, and a CCPA representation where the public is at risk. A short consultation can help you map the right combination for your specific facts.

The takeaway for any buyer reading this is simple. If you have been sold a fake, you have more legal options than you think. The cheater is hoping you will give up after one phone call. The law is on your side, and it is on more than one floor of the same building.

Frequently Asked Questions

What exactly are spurious goods under Indian law?

Section 2(43) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 defines spurious goods as goods which are falsely claimed to be genuine. So any product being passed off as something it is not — fake medicine, fake cosmetics, counterfeit brand products, mislabelled food, repackaged unbranded goods sold under a famous name — falls within this definition. It is wider than counterfeit in trademark law because it covers any false claim of genuineness, not only registered-trademark imitations.

Can I file both a consumer complaint and a police FIR for the same fake product?

Yes. Indian courts have repeatedly held that civil and criminal remedies based on the same facts are not mutually exclusive. The consumer forum decides your refund, replacement and damages. The police investigate the cheating or spurious-goods offence and the criminal court decides on punishment. The two can run in parallel and often strengthen each other — an FIR can make a stubborn seller settle the civil case faster.

Which is faster — consumer forum or police FIR?

The consumer forum is usually faster for getting your money and damages because it is a documentary, time-bound process under the 2019 Act. A criminal trial can take years before judgment. So if your priority is refund and compensation, start with the consumer complaint. If your priority is punishing the cheater or stopping a public-harm fake from spreading, start with the FIR. For serious cases, do both.

Where can I file a consumer complaint for spurious goods?

Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission handles claims up to fifty lakh rupees, the State Commission handles above fifty lakh up to two crore, and the National Commission handles above two crore. You can file in your own district where you live or where the cause of action arose, which often gives a buyer a local-court advantage.

What is Section 91 of the Consumer Protection Act and how does it help me?

Section 91 is a specific criminal offence for manufacturing, storing, selling, distributing or importing spurious goods. The punishment is graded by harm — up to one year for ordinary injury, up to seven years for grievous hurt, and not less than seven years going up to life imprisonment if the act causes death. Offences causing grievous hurt or death are cognizable and non-bailable. Citing Section 91 alongside the general cheating law strengthens your criminal complaint and signals to the accused that you mean business.

What sections of the criminal code apply to selling fake goods?

The classic provisions are Section 415 IPC (cheating, now Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and Section 420 IPC (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, now Section 318(4) BNS). On top of these, Section 91 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 is a dedicated spurious-goods offence. Depending on the product, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the Food Safety and Standards Act, and the Trade Marks Act may also apply. A criminal lawyer chooses the right combination for the facts.

What if the police refuse to register my FIR for spurious goods?

First insist on a written acknowledgement of your complaint at the police station. If the FIR is still not registered, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides remedies. You can approach the Superintendent of Police in writing, and if that fails you can move the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175 BNSS (the equivalent of the old Section 156(3) CrPC) for a direction to register and investigate. The Magistrate's order makes registration of the FIR mandatory.

Do I need to prove the seller knew the goods were fake?

For the consumer forum case, no. The Consumer Protection Act treats the sale of spurious goods as an unfair trade practice irrespective of whether the seller knew, because the buyer has been wronged. For the criminal cheating case under Section 318 BNS / 420 IPC, you need to show dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, which the courts often infer from circumstances — the seller's lack of valid invoices, the fact that the product fails brand verification, or a pattern of similar complaints against the same seller.

Can I get compensation in the FIR route, or only in the consumer forum?

Compensation in the criminal route is limited. A criminal court can order fine and direct part of the fine to be paid to the victim, but the primary purpose of the FIR is punishment of the accused, not personal compensation. For full refund, replacement, mental agony damages, and punitive damages, the consumer forum under the Consumer Protection Act is the proper route. That is why a parallel filing in both routes is usually wiser than picking only one.

What is the role of the CCPA in spurious goods cases?

The Central Consumer Protection Authority is a regulator created under Section 10 of the 2019 Act. For spurious goods affecting many consumers, the CCPA can investigate under Section 18, order recall of unsafe goods under Section 20, fine misleading advertisers under Section 21, and use search-and-seizure powers under Section 22. A complaint to the CCPA does not replace your consumer forum case or your FIR — it works alongside them to address the wider public harm and force a market-level remedy.

Are spurious goods cases time-barred?

There are limitation periods to watch. A consumer complaint under the 2019 Act must generally be filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action arose, although the Commission can condone delay for sufficient cause. For the criminal route, limitation depends on the offence — serious offences like cheating under Section 318 BNS have longer or no specific limitation. Best practice is to act immediately after discovering the fake, while evidence is fresh.

Can the chemist or retailer who unknowingly sold me a fake also be held liable?

Yes, in the consumer forum the retailer is usually the first respondent because that is whom you bought from. The retailer can in turn implead the distributor and the manufacturer to recover his liability. In the criminal route, mere unknowing sale by a small retailer may not amount to cheating if dishonest intention is absent, but Section 91 of the CP Act can still apply because it does not require knowledge of fakeness for the basic offence. Where the retailer was clearly part of the fraud chain, both civil and criminal liability follow.

For more articles on Indian law, visit the Pinaka Legal Blog.