• HOME»
  • Legally Speaking»
  • Karnataka High Court Quashed Prosecution Against ANI Technologies, CEO Upon Being Told Of Settlement Between Parties

Karnataka High Court Quashed Prosecution Against ANI Technologies, CEO Upon Being Told Of Settlement Between Parties

The Karnataka High Court in the case ANI Technologies Private Limited AND State of Karnataka and Others observed and has quashed the prosecution initiated under ANI Technologies Private Limited AND State of Karnataka & Others The single bench headed by Justice K Natarajan in the case observed and has allowed the petition and has quashed the FIR registered by […]

Advertisement
Karnataka High Court Quashed Prosecution Against ANI Technologies, CEO Upon Being Told Of Settlement Between Parties

The Karnataka High Court in the case ANI Technologies Private Limited AND State of Karnataka and Others observed and has quashed the prosecution initiated under ANI Technologies Private Limited AND State of Karnataka & Others
The single bench headed by Justice K Natarajan in the case observed and has allowed the petition and has quashed the FIR registered by the Jeevan Bheemanagar Police Station under sections 63 and 64 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
In the present case, the bench allowed the petition after the joint memo was filed by the petitioners and Lahari Recording Company (the complainant), wherein it is stated that the parties had settled their issues between them amicably and therefore, prayed for compounding the offences and to quash the FIR registered in the year 2017.
It was also alleged by the complainant that the petitioners used pirated music on OlaPlay tabs installed in the cabs.
Therefore, the services were launched in November 2016 to enhance the passenger experience of those riding in the cabs.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case observed that the parties are permitted to compound the offence. Thus, the court allowed the petition and the FIR in Crime No.191/2017 dated August 20, 2017 against the accused Nos.1 and 2 is hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the court allowed the plea.
The counsel, HCGP K. Nageshwarappa appeared for R1.
The counsel, Advocate Pranav Kumar M represented for R2.

Tags:

Advertisement