IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.V. MURALIDARAN, J.
Anand Purusothaman - Petitioner
Vs.
The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Cell, Central Crime Branch, Chennai and Ors. - Respondents
Crl.R.C. No. 1130 of 2017 and Crl.M.P. No. 10691 & 10692 of 2017 and Crl.M.P. No. 16688 of 2017
Decided On : 28-04-2018
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 411, 420, 414 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 239 , 401 , 156(3) , 173 and 239 - Indian Copy Right Act - Section 63 - Information Technology Act - Section 66(B) - Defacto-complainant - Offence of Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property – Criminal breach of trust - Charge sheet - 2nd respondent herein is working as Assistant Manager, Administration of M/s. Photon Infotech Private Limited, filed a complaint against petitioner herein and 6 others alleging that the 1st accused namely, a former employee of Defacto-complainant company, by colluding with petitioner/A2 involved and thereby committed offence of data theft of the datas belong to defacto complainant’s company and illegally transferred same to second accused company - Accused hence involved in Criminal breach of Trust and thereby cheated defacto complainant company - Out of above illegality, the defacto complainant suffered a loss to tune of Rs.10 Crores - Thus due to above wrongful loss caused to the defacto complainant and wrongful gain to 2nd accused by the said, above complaint was lodged – Held, Court has to form and opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts - Such persons are called experts - In this connection following illustration is applicable to facts of the instant case - There is no dishonest receipt or retention of any stolen computers resource or communication devices on the part of revision petitioner herein - As discussed above that in absence of receipts of any e-mail by which communication said to have been shared, in considered opinion of this court, final report filed under Section 66(B) of Information Technology Act cannot be invoked - Hence, this court is having no option except to allow criminal revision case - Criminal Revision Petition is allowed, by setting aside order in Crl.M.P.No.3911 of 2016 in C.C.No.3816 of 2016 on the file of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate - Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
The second accused in C.C.No.3816 of 2016 on the file the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai is the revision petitioner before this Court as against the dismissal of his discharge petition filed under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. in Crl.M.P.No.3911 of 2016 dated 10.07.2017.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the Defacto-complainant (i.e.) the 2nd respondent herein is working as Assistant Manager, Administration of M/s. Photon Infotech Private Limited, filed a complaint against the petitioner herein and 6 others alleging that the 1st accused namely Thennavan Asaithambi, a former employee of the Defacto-complainant company, by colluding with the petitioner/A2 involved and thereby committed the offence of data theft of the datas belong to the defacto complainant’s company and illegally transferred the same to the second accused company namely M/s. Payoda Technology Company, which is a business competitor of the defacto complainant.
3. The accused hence involved in Criminal breach of Trust and thereby cheated the defacto complainant company. Out of the above illegality, the defacto complainant suffered a loss to the tune of Rs.10 Crores. Thus due to the above wrongful loss caused to the defacto complainant and wrongful gain to the 2nd accused by the said Thennavan Asaithambi, the above complaint was lodged.
4. It is the further case of the prosecution that the 1st accused Thennavan involved in the above illegality while he was working as the capacity of Director of Sales in defacto complainant's company. During the course of employment in the month of November, 2012, A-1 illegally transferred highly confidential information stored in the form of datas relating to the business strategies and solutions to the 2nd accused company. The said confidential information stood developed by the complainant over the period of several man hours and with high configuration computer equipments worth about Rs.2 to 3 Crores. A1, Thennavan Asaithambi was entrusted with a Sony laptop bearing Serial No. 275450617002795 and also provided with complainant's company email id namely thennavan@photoninfotech.net, thennavan@photoninfotech.com, thennavan@photon.in, for his personal use, but for the usage of the storing of the datas in respect of the company and he was using the same with his own password till he was relieved from the post in the month of April, 2013. While so, on scrutiny of the Laptop and Email ids provided by the defacto complainant's company, it was found that On 11.10.2012 @ 20:20 hours (A1) Thennavan Asaithambi had sent a mail from his email account thennavan@photoninfotech.net, to (A2) Anand Purusothaman, MD of competitor company, to his e-mail account anand.purusothaman@payoda.com, wherein (A-1) Thennavan Asaithambi sent vital confidential information/computer resource in the form of paper presentation relating to Complainant's Company. In actual, in November, 2012, a foreign firm “Touch Tunes Inc” had placed orders to provide software services and based on the same, Photon Info Tech Pvt. Ltd, i.e. the complainant company, developed the said confidential data/computer resource and had also quoted the rate for carrying out the services and the same was sent to “Touch Tunes Inc”. (A1) Thennavan Asaithambi was the Director of sales at the relevant point of time and he was the key sales person engaged with the customer who was expected to maintain strict confidentiality and secrecy on business matters. Further it is his one of the prime duties not to disclose the secret datas to any one in any mode. However, by breaching all such norms, (A1) Thennavan Asaithambi illegally transferred the business presentation developed for “Touch Tunes” through his mail I.D. thennavan@photoninfotech.net, to the mail I.D. anand.purusothaman@payoda.com, on 10.11.2012 at 19:09 hours, enabling “Payoda Technologies” i.e. the competitor company to present the same with slight modification in order to quote lesser price to Touch Tunes
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.