Decision in State V. Amit - Gurgaon Data Theft Case
u/s 381 IPC & 72 of Information Technology Act, 2000 *


  1. The above named accused has been sent by S.H.O. of Police Station Vihar Gurgaon to stand trial for committing the offence punishable u/s 381 IPC & 72 of Information Technology Act under FIR registered with Police Station, Gurgaon.

  2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case of the prosecution are that on 4.9.2005, complainant Chief Controller Ops Administration of MNC Company submitted a complaint to the SHO P.S. Gurgaon for lodging of FIR for the cyber crime by an employee. It was mentioned in the complaint that the accused, employed as a Team Leader, with their Company had been indulging in an Act of cyber crime, wherein he has been illegally transmitting their data to unauthorized persons. He was caught while transmitting the data from their computer systems and files had been downloaded as a proof of his misconduct. On the basis of that complaint, formal FIR was registered.

  3. A copy of challan was supplied to the accused, free of costs, as provided us 207 of Cr.P.C.

  4. On finding a prima facie case, the accused was charge-sheeted u/s 381 IPC & 72 of Information Technology Act vide order dated 12.6.2007. to which the accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial.

  5. In its evidence, the prosecution has examined PWI.

  6. Since complainant did not support the case of the prosecution, therefore, realising the futility of examining remaining witnesses, evidence of the prosecution was closed by Id. PP for the State vide his statement, recorded on separate sheet.

  7. There, was nothing incriminating against the accused to be put to him, therefore, recording of statement of accused to be put to him, therefore, recording of statement of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. was dispensed with.

  8. Arguments addressed by ld. PP for the State and Id. Defence counsel have been heard besides going through the case file minutely.

  9. The questions which arises for determination in this case are:

    • Whether during the year 2005, the above named accused while ernployed as a team leader with MNC Gurgaon, committed the theft of computer data of the company ?

    • Whether on the same date place and time, the accused being the employee of the company having access to the electronic record of company transmitted the data to unauthorized person ?

  10. After having heard the rival contentions advaced by the learned PP for the State and the learned defence counsel and after going through the evidence placed on record by the prosecution and the case file minutely, the court is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove its allegations against the accused for the reasons hereinafter recorded.

  11. PW1 is star witness of this case. The PW-1 in his examination-in-chief has partially supported the prosecution case qua the fact that accused, who was an employee of their Company has committed an act of Cyber Crime and in this regard, he (PW1) submitted a complaint EX. P1 to the Police for lodging of FIR. But PWI further deposed that he himself has not investigated the case nor he has any personal knowledge about the case. No investigation was conducted in his presence. He was never called by Police for further investigation nor his statement was recorded. PW1 was declared hostile on the request of learned Public Prosecutor and learned Public Prosecutor was allowed to cross-examine him. In his cross-examinationm PW1 has stated that he has seen recovery memo Ex. P2 which bears his signature on some blank papers. Nothing favorable to the prosecution could be extracted in the cross-examination of PW-1 conducted by learned Public Prosecutor.

  12. Since the complainant i.e. PW1 has not supported the prosecution case and no other witness has been examined by the prosecution, therefore, it is held that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused and as such the accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him. His bonds are discharged. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.






* The name of the MNC, witness and full name of the accused have been supressed due to the same been demanded by a person interested in the matter.

For Cyber Law Consultancy, Domain names regn, Web Development & Hosting - Archer Softech Pvt Ltd, visit us at http://www.archersoftech.com