Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. Brief facts, as culled out from the FIR, are that M/s TCY Learning Solutions Private Limited is leader in the field of education technology and test preparation including classroom and online coaching. The company has been in the business for more than a decade and had developed its own software for imparting education. Petitioner No.1 had joined the Company in February, 2015 as Deputy Manager Marketing and subsequently resigned to set up another company along with Jagjit Singh (petitioner No.2) and one Rupinder Singh in the year 2018 and formed a Company in the name of M/s Exoways Web Technologies Pvt. Ltd. That there was leakage of its software. The complainant got to know from the market that a company under the brand name of "Fourmodules.in/Fourmodules.com" was providing software with similar look and use as that of the complainant. Therefore, the complainant in order to check theft from the employees created a fake client data which had fake E-mail Ids. The said data was posted on the server of the company and its access was open to the employees of the Company. The complainant was stunned when it received a promotional mail from Fourmodules.in/Fourmodules.com on an email ID which was fake and intentionally added in the fake client data which was posted on server of the company. The said Email ID was not used at any other place. It was created to find about the leakage in the complainant's company. The said data/email ID was posted on the server of the company and its access was open only to select few and accused No. 1 (Rahul Nagpal) was one of them. That the complainant investigated and found out that the software used by 2 of 7 accused no. 3 to 5 with others is based on the Source Codes of the complainant's software (as taken from FIR).

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the pleadings of the case as well as the two reports relied upon by the petitioners as well as the complainant.

10. Even though, the report relied by the learned counsel for the petitioners, concludes "The aforesaid 10 images are open-source and freely available on the internet. Anyone can use/edit/modify these images since 5 of 7 they are without copyright of the original author.", however, the observations made in the said report to the extent "We do not have access to TCYONLINE application and it is not possible to ascertain if a software has been copied/stolen without comparing the Source Code, Database Architecture & Database. A detailed, deep & thorough comparison of both the Web Application is required to reach any conclusion" cannot be ignored. There is a categoric finding therein that it would not be possible to ascertain if the software has been copied/stolen when compared with the Source Code of TCYONLINE Application. Whereas, on the other hand, there is also a report of M/s Webrosoft Solutions Private Limited, which had done a comparison of two web applications for PTE and IELTS mock test modules found on https:www.tcyonline.com and https://fourmodules.in was carried out both visually and using professional file comparisons tools as appropriate. The two web applications were found to be using many identical files with same names and identical digital fingerprints, similar layouts and similar programming code snippets. The report of M/s Webrosoft Solutions Private Limited further holds "Further the final PTE Academic score report generated by PTE modules of both the web applications after the test is completed by the candidate also has strong similarities in appearance including title of the score card graph "Scaled Score" appearing exactly at the same position at value 26 of the 0-90 scale provided on both the web applications"