Data Theft Becoming A Menace Of Digital Age, Must Be Nipped In The Bud: Karnataka High Court

Update: 2023-07-25 11:52 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

Data thieving has become a menace in these digital days and will have to be nipped, the Karnataka High Court observed recently.The remarks were made by single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while refusing to quash the proceedings initiated against two persons accused of having stolen client data from their previous employer and misusing it by joining a rival company.The petitioners...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

Data thieving has become a menace in these digital days and will have to be nipped, the Karnataka High Court observed recently.

The remarks were made by single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while refusing to quash the proceedings initiated against two persons accused of having stolen client data from their previous employer and misusing it by joining a rival company.

The petitioners have been charged under sections 408, 504, 506 of the IPC and under Sections 66 and 66C of the Information Technology Act.

It is alleged that the complainant-Company had undertaken certain investigation which revealed that petitioners had stolen data from it, in violation of their non-disclosure agreements.

The petitioners argued there is no material against them and that the allege client data was already in the public domain.

The Court however, on going through the records said the case is shrouded with seriously disputed questions of fact and therefore, it would not be prudent to quash the proceedings at this stage. “The allegation against the petitioners is that they have been thieving all the data belonging to the clients of the complainant/Company and using it for the purpose of development of business of the rival Company, and have therefore, violated the non-disclosure agreement of the Company, which would become an offence as alleged for the aforesaid offences.

Accordingly, it rejected the petition.

Case Title: Naveen Kumar R @ Naveen & ANR And State of Karnataka.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3173 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

Date of Order: 12-07-2023

Appearance: Advocate Siji Malyali for Petitioners

HCGP Mahesh Shetty for R1.

Senior Advocate Arun Shyam, Advocates Narayan Babu D N, Akshay S Vasist, Anirudh A Kulkarni for R2.

Full View


Tags:    

Similar News