Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"The Megabyte Company has informed the hacking software through e-mails. But I have not produced those e-mails. Any of the directors of Megabyte Company did not come to India to file the complaint in this matter. After verifying the file the witness deposes that there is no document showing that the megabyte company has named the present accused responsible for hacking the software".
"The Technical Director and the Project Manager will be the person who are in possession of source code. One Mustan Zirowala was the Technical Director of IT MUST company. Depending upon the size of the project we constitute the themes. It is true to suggest that we will not inform the source code to all the five teams. We split the work among five team. The project manager will assign the particular work to team. It is true to suggest that every employee of the company will not be knowing the source code of particular software".
"I cannot give the specific date as to when the Megabyte Company has come to know about hacking of the data. Now I cannot remember the exact date when the said Megabyte Company made the complaint to me about the hacking of the data. Probably it may be in the month of September 2002".
10 C.C.No.5810/2007
"I have produced the copy of the said fax in this case. After going through the case papers witness deposed that the copy of the said fax is not available. I cannot say after hacking the data to whom the accused have sold the information".

It is elicited in the cross-examination of P.W.4 that:

"Before the complainant filed the complaint, I had no any information about hacking of his account. I had not received any message either from Indian Embassy or from the office of the Police Commissioner regarding hacking of the Source code".
"During my investigation I have not collected said agreement from the complainant. Except the copy of the source code, the complainant has not produced any other documents to show that the company has developed the said source code".

13. There is no legal evidence that accused had stolen software and sold them to some other person. Ex.P4 is the agreement dated 28-3-2000 entered into between Sansui Software Ltd., Pune and Megabyte. No document is produced by the prosecution to show that there was agreement between Megabyte Ltd., and complainant Company to develop software. There is no document to show that who has hacked the software, when it was hacked, what was hacked and how it was hacked. There is absolutely no evidence that the accused had hacked the software of complainant's Company.