Bombay High Court
Google India Pvt. Ltd., Through Deepak ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 7 September, 2022
Author: Madhav J. Jamdar
Bench: Revati Mohite Dere, Madhav J. Jamdar
Digitally
signed by
SHAGUFTA
SHAGUFTA Q PATHAN
Q PATHAN Date: 40-WP-1993-2022.doc
2022.09.08
18:31:52
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1993 OF 2022
Google India Pvt. Ltd.
Through its authorised signatory
Deepak Kumar Singh & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Amit Desai, Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, Mr.
Shailesh Poria, Mr. Akash Manwani, Mr. C. Keshwani and Mr. Dinesh
Pednekar i/b Economic Laws Practice for the Petitioners
Ms. M. H. Mhatre, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1-State
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ.
WEDNESDAY, 7th SEPTEMBER 2022 P.C. :
1 At the outset, learned senior counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to amend to transpose respondent No.3 as party petitioner No.4, having regard to the fact that she is an employee of the petitioner No.1. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out SQ Pathan 1/4 40-WP-1993-2022.doc forthwith. Vakalatnama on behalf of the said petitioner be filed in the Registry within two weeks from today.
2 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners. 3 By this petition, the petitioners seek quashing and setting aside of the complaint bearing C.C. No. 1510/MISC/2021 filed by the respondent No.2; the impugned order dated 20 th December 2021 passed below the said complaint by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai; and the first information report bearing No. 52/2022 dated 25 th January 2022 registered by the MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 51, 63 and 69 of the Copyright Act.
4 Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1-Company has nothing to do with YouTube, YouTube being a separate entity. He submits that the petitioners play no role in the ownership, operation, administration or functioning of YouTube. SQ Pathan 2/4
40-WP-1993-2022.doc He submits that the respondent No. 2 has filed the aforesaid complaint before the learned Magistrate suppressing the fact, that civil proceedings have been initiated by him as against `YouTube' before this Court. He further submits that YouTube, on the complaints made by the respondent No. 2, has removed 147 URL/uploaded material, pursuant to the said complaints. He submits that the petitioners have no connection with the said uploading of material on YouTube and as such, ought not to have been made party to the complaint filed by the respondent No. 2.
5 Issue notice to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, returnable on 10th October 2022. Learned A.P.P waives notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State and seeks time to take instructions. 6 In addition to Court notice, petitioners to serve the respondent No.2 by private notice and file an affidavit of service before the returnable date.
SQ Pathan 3/4
40-WP-1993-2022.doc 7 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, in the meantime, till the next date, no coercive steps to be taken qua the petitioners.
8 Needless to state that it is open for the petitioners to depute a responsible Officer from the petitioner No.1-Company to appear before the concerned police station. 9 Stand over to 10th October 2022.
10 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. SQ Pathan 4/4