1 ABA 438.11.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 438 OF 2011 Mr. Abhishek S/o. Muthian. ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. A.M. Saraogi for the Applicant Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State. CORAM : A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 15th JUNE 2011. P.C. :- Heard. 2. The Applicant was an employee of M/s. Atom Technologies Limited. This company was doing the business of making software for different companies. Nokia Company wanted to introduce a new model of mobile telephone and entrusted the task of creating awareness regarding the technical knowhow of the said phone to M/s. Atom Technologies Ltd. The Applicant had been entrusted with the said job on behalf of M/s. Atom Technologies Ltd. 3. The allegation against the Applicant is that he disclosed the confidential information regarding the prototype on internet - on his personal website - and face-book. The 2 ABA 438.11.sxw allegation is that by doing so, the Applicant committed offences punishable under Sections 43 and 72 of the Information Technology Act and the offences punishable under Sections 408 of I.P.C. and 420 of I.P.C. 4. Section 43 of the Information Technology Act does not create any offence. It speaks only of compensation. Section 72, indeed, creates a penal offence but it is difficult to see how the provisions of the said Section can be said to be applicable to the Applicant, inasmuch as, he cannot be said to have secured access to any electronic record, ‘in pursuance of the powers, conferred under the Information Technology Act.’ 5. I have repeatedly asked the learned APP as to how the facts alleged would disclose the commission of offences punishable under Sections 408 of I.P.C. and 420 of I.P.C., but the learned APP merely kept mentioning that the Applicant has put the confidential information on internet, on his personal website. 6. Prima-facie, the offences punishable under Section 408 of I.P.C. or 420 of I.P.C., are not disclosed from the facts alleged. The Applicant, primarily, appears to have committed a civil wrong. 7. In any case, it does not appear that the detention of the Applicant is essential for the purposes of investigation. In fact, the Investigating Officer, who is present in the Court, 3 ABA 438.11.sxw states that it would be sufficient for the purposes of investigation if the Applicant is made to attend the Police Station and make himself available for investigation/interrogation. 8. In these circumstances, it would be proper to allow the anticipatory bail application. 9. In the event of his arrest, the Applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, with one surety in like amount, or two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, on the condition to attend the concerned Police Station, every day, between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m., for a period of one week and make himself available for investigation/interrogation. The Applicant shall, even, thereafter, attend the Police Station as and when required by the Investigating Officer. (A.M. THIPSAY,J.)