Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(e) It is stated that the educational institutions of the company have completed 90% of the syllabus by 15 th May, 2021 and only revision syllabus remained uncompleted. So, after stealing the data of the company, accused 1 to 3 have floated a fictitious institution by imitating the name of Gosala branches of the company deceptively similar to the same under the name and style "Gosalites Medical Academy"

at Poranki Village. Accused 1 to 3 started using the said stolen data in the said Medical Academy in criminal breach of trust and they started luring the lecturers of the VEMPL CMR, J.

under the Special Enactment i.e., the I.T. Act and also the IPC and when the said offences are distinct and separate, there is no bar to prosecute the accused for the offences under the IPC also albeit they are also liable for prosecution under the I.T. Act. He would also contend that there is no conflict between the offences under the I.T. Act and the offences under the IPC and as such the bar under Section 81 of the I.T. Act has no application to the present facts of the case. He would contend that stealing data is an offence under the I.T. Act whereas misappropriating data and committing criminal breach of trust is an offence under the IPC and as such when the facts of the case constitute two separate and distinct offences, the accused are liable to be prosecuted for the offences both under the I.T. Act and the IPC. So, he would submit that the facts of the case in the judgment relied on by the petitioners reported in Sharat Babu Digumarti v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi3 are distinguishable and they are not applicable to the present facts of the case. He would contend that the petitioners, who are admittedly employees of the company and who undertook to maintain confidentiality of the data developed by the company and its educational institutions in their Employment Agreement, committed breach of trust and have stolen the entire data of the company and its educational institutions and misappropriated the same for their use by 3 (2017) 2 SCC 18 CMR, J.

43. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that as there is an employment agreement between A1 to A3 being the employees and their employer i.e. VEMPL that at best the alleged acts committed by A1 to A3 amount to committing breach of agreement and it gives rise to only a civil liability and criminal prosecution even for extracting the data illegally in breach of confidentiality as per the terms of the agreement is not maintainable. Also contends that as there is a clause for arbitration in case of any dispute arises out of the said agreement that the parties have to work out their remedy by resorting to arbitration and criminal prosecution is not an appropriate remedy.