Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
MR.RAHUL PANDYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and initial facts (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding confidentiality breach (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court observations on contract versus criminal law (Para 6 , 9 , 12) |
| 4. ratio on breach of contract and criminal intent (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. order to quash fir and declaration of proceedings (Para 13) |
CAV ORDER
The petitioner/accused is knocking at the doors of this Court in the subject petition calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.1145 of 2020 for offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of the IPC and Sections 66C, 66D and 72A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (‘the Act’ for short).
2. Heard Sri C.S.Ravi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri K. Raghavendra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-
The 2nd respondent/Samsung R & D Institute India-Bangalore Private Limited (‘the Company’ for short) is the complainant. The petitioner on completion of his Master’s in Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur and securing first rank accepts offer of employment
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
