Delhi High Court has restrained Rupa Publications from selling its red-and-black ‘coat-pocket’ Constitution, noting that its design closely resembles EBC’s edition. The Court observed that such similarity is likely to mislead unsuspecting consumers regarding the source.
The Delhi High Court issued an injunction against Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd., preventing the company from publishing or selling its coat-pocket edition of the Constitution of India.
This decision came after the court found that the trade dress of Rupa’s edition closely resembled that of the red-and-black edition published by Eastern Book Company (EBC).
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora granted the interim injunction following a lawsuit filed by EBC.
The court noted that the two competing coat-pocket editions were, at first glance, deceptively similar and could confuse consumers.
The Court noted,
“To an unwary consumer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection, the trade dress of the defendant’s impugned coat-pocket editions is likely to appear identical to that of the plaintiffs’ coat-pocket editions. Such a similarity is likely to mislead consumers regarding the source or origin of the said products,”
EBC, along with its publishing arm Eastern Publishing Pvt. Ltd., argued that they have been producing portable coat-pocket editions of bare acts since 2009, characterized by a distinctive red-and-black color scheme, specific font, gold leafing, and thin bible paper.
These editions are considered flagship products, having built significant goodwill and being widely used by lawyers, judges, politicians, and the general public.
Senior Advocates Jayant Mehta and Swati Sukumar, representing EBC, claimed that Rupa Publications had copied key features of their trade dress, such as the color scheme, font style, gold detailing, and layout.
They alleged that in September 2025, EBC lost a confirmed order for 18,000 copies because a buyer was misled by Rupa’s claims that its edition was identical but offered at a lower price.
Justice Arora referenced a previous ruling by the Delhi High Court in Colgate Palmolive Co. v. Anchor Health and Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd., which affirmed that while no party can claim exclusive rights to a single color, a distinctive combination used consistently over time is protected under intellectual property law.
The order recorded,
“Trade dress, which includes colour combination, layout, container shape, and overall design, enjoys strong protection against imitation, as it identifies the source of goods,”
Finding a substantial likelihood of confusion and potential irreparable harm to EBC, the court determined that the balance of convenience favored EBC. Consequently, it prohibited Rupa Publications and its affiliates from engaging with the contested design.
The court ordered Rupa to cease manufacturing, publishing, marketing, soliciting orders, and selling the coat-pocket edition in a trade dress similar to EBC’s iconic red-and-black style. Additionally, it mandated the recall of unsold stock.
The order stated,
“The defendant (Rupa) … [shall] remove any/all and recall their unsold inventory … and remove their listings or listings of the third parties … from all the e-commerce platforms,”
Similar orders were also issued against Young Global Publications and Professional Book Publishers.
EBC was represented by Senior Advocates Rajshekar Rao, Abhishek Malhotra, and J Sai Deepak, with the support of advocates Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Garima Bajaj, Kumar Karan, Kanav Agarwal, Shagun Agarwal, Zeeshan Ahmed, Sajal Awasthi, Kartikay Dutta, Anukriti Trivedi, and Ritik Raghuvanshi.
Case Title: EBC Publishing Private Limited vs. Rupa Publications
Read Attachment