The Calcutta High Court recently quashed an order summoning Microsoft Global Services Centre (India) in a case related to the sale of a pirated version of Microsoft Office on Amazon..Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee found that the magistrate did not follow the mandatory procedure under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) while issuing the summoning order. Section 202 CrPC states that when an accused resides at a place beyond the jurisdiction of magistrate, the court must conduct an enquiry or investigation before issuing the process.“It appears that ld. Magistrate issued the process under section 204 of the Cr.P.C. by a cryptic order on 24th January 2022,” the High Court said, adding that mandatory enquiry was not conducted in the case..In 2021, D&I Taxcon Services Private Limited had filed a complaint before a metropolitan magistrate in Kolkata against eight accused including Microsoft. It was stated that the firm in 2019 purchased ‘Microsoft Office Home & Business, 2019’ through Amazon and the product was received with a product key for installation. However, at the time of the installation of the software, the firm faced a problem. Following some communication with Microsoft, a separate product key was provided, but the software again could not be installed. The problem persisted even after another key was provided. The complainant alleged that despite repeated requests, the issue was not resolved. Ultimately, Microsoft in 2021 informed the complainant firm that it had been cheated, as it had received a pirated version of the software from the seller on Amazon. .Justice Mukherjee found that the complainant had not made any contact or agreement with Microsoft, but instead purchased it from one Datacorp Software LLP through Amazon India.“It is not in dispute from the complaint that the ‘Microsoft’ had detected that the software which the opposite party no.2 had allegedly purchased from accused no.1 through Amazon is not a genuine one but a pirated version,” the Court said.The Court further said that there was nothing on record to show that Microsoft was connected with Datacorp or its partners. “If the said product is a pirated version, as detected, it should have been made clear by the complainant why ‘Microsoft’ would manufacture pirated version and what is the role of present petitioners in manufacturing and/or marketing pirated version of its own product,” it added..Consequently, the Court quashed the summoning order since the mandatory procedure was not followed. However, the Court remitted the matter to the magistrate for passing a fresh order.“It is made clear that I may not be misunderstood that I am suggesting that these two petitioners/accused persons cannot be proceeded with at all but what is emphasized is that there is no presumption against these two accused persons for committing the alleged offence from the complaint and the initial deposition and since these two petitioners reside outside the jurisdiction of the Magistrate concerned, the magistrate was required to apply his mind on the above mentioned aspects, while passing summoning order under section 204 Cr.P.C.".Advocates Sandipan Ganguly, Ayan Bhattacharjee, Shounak Mitra, Zulfikar Ali Alquaderi and Aditya Sarkar represented Microsoft.Advocates Tapas Dutta and Matrayee Chatterjee represented the complainant..[Read Judgment]
