Pradeep Saran v. State

The Cyber Blog IndiaCase Summary

Quashing of FIR in a case involving the set up of a demo application of TASMAC for selling liquor online

Pradeep Saran & Ors v. State
(2023) 3 MWN (Cri) 516
In the High Court of Madras
Crl. O.P. 4037/2021 and Crl. M.P. 2483, 2486/2021
Before Justice Sunder Mohan
Decided on March 30, 2023

Relevancy of the Case: Quashing of FIR in a case involving the set up of a demo application of TASMAC for selling liquor online

Statutes and Provisions Involved

  • The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66D)
  • The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420, 415)

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • The petitioners allegedly started a partnership firm named Future Stacks involved in website development in 2016.
  • They were approached by the third petitioner regarding the development of a liquor-selling application.
  • They used the TASMAC logo and brand name in the application without official permission and circulated it as a genuine web application on social networking platforms.
  • The petitioners’ actions attracted more web traffic, increasing their business presence.
  • The petitioners’ unauthorised use of the TASMAC logo and brand name led the general public to call TASMAC and inquire about the website.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

  • The petitioners’ counsel stated that they intended to develop a demo application (or a beta app) and pitch it to TASMAC. Using a client’s logo is a standard practice in the IT industry. There is no substantial evidence supporting any wrongful loss to any person or gain to the petitioners.
  • The respondent’s counsel argued that the weblink misled the general public.

Opinion of the Bench

  • Copying the name and logo for a demo app is reprehensible conduct by the petitioners.
  • For the petitioners’ act to constitute the offence of cheating, there must be a dishonest intention to deceive and a resulting wrongful loss to the persons or gain to the petitioners.
  • The final report fails to conclusively establish that the petitioners’ conduct caused any loss. It only asserts vaguely that web traffic led to increased business.

Final Decision

  • The court allowed the petition and quashed the corresponding FIR.

Sreekutty R, an undergraduate student at National Law University Odisha, prepared this case summary during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2023.