The Calcutta High Court has set aside an order summoning Microsoft Global Services Centre (India) in a case concerning the sale of a pirated version of Microsoft Office on Amazon, citing procedural lapses.

Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that the metropolitan magistrate failed to adhere to the mandatory requirements under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before issuing the summoning order.

As per Section 202 CrPC, if an accused resides beyond the jurisdiction of the magistrate, an inquiry or investigation must be conducted before summoning them.

The High Court noted that the magistrate had issued the summoning order under Section 204 CrPC on January 24, 2022, without conducting the required inquiry.

The case originated from a complaint filed in 2021 by D&I Taxcon Services Private Limited before a Kolkata metropolitan magistrate against eight accused, including Microsoft. The complainant stated that in 2019, they purchased ‘Microsoft Office Home & Business 2019’ through Amazon and received a product key for installation. However, they encountered issues during installation. Despite receiving multiple product keys from Microsoft, the problem persisted.

In 2021, Microsoft informed the complainant that they had been deceived, as the software purchased from a seller on Amazon, Datacorp Software LLP, was a pirated version.

Justice Mukherjee pointed out that the complainant had no direct dealings with Microsoft but had instead purchased the product from Datacorp Software LLP via Amazon India. The Court also noted that there was no evidence linking Microsoft to 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 versions and what role the present petitioners played in manufacturing or marketing a pirated version of its own product,” the Court stated.

Accordingly, the High Court quashed the summoning order due to non-compliance with procedural requirements. However, it remitted the matter to the magistrate for reconsideration and a fresh order.

“It is made clear that I may not be misunderstood as suggesting that these two petitioners/accused persons cannot be proceeded against at all. However, there is no presumption against them for committing the alleged offence based on the complaint and initial deposition. Since they reside outside the jurisdiction of the concerned magistrate, due consideration of these aspects was necessary before passing a summoning order under Section 204 CrPC,” the Court clarified.

Microsoft was represented by Advocates Sandipan Ganguly, Ayan Bhattacharjee, Shounak Mitra, Zulfikar Ali Alquaderi, and Aditya Sarkar, while Advocates Tapas Dutta and Matrayee Chatterjee appeared for the complainant.