In the present case the phone bills of the complainant were sent to an unknown person without his consent.

Court in the present case held that CDR is a sensitive personal data under the section 43A of The IT Act,2000 but since complainant had various criminal cases filed against him by respondents and even he knew the respondents but still the filed the case in the name of ‘unknown persons’ as legal notice was sent to the respondents through advocate of complainant. He failed to return the SIM card and portrayed himself as a subscriber instead of user. In this case Vodafone had sent a full CDR in the monthly bill to the the ex-employer where he was workimg as director, when the complainant complained to vodafone, they had taken action against their executive, which showed that they had committed breach of privacy internally. This court also finds that the privacy policy of the Vodafone is highly against customers.

It was held that complainant will not get any compensation because he did not approach the court in good faith and Vodafone is ordered to pay 10,000 rupees to the state treasury within one month.

Vodafone filed an appeal against this order and court asked them to pay 50,000 as cost to continue appeal else they can withdraw the same. Vodafone withdrew the appeal accordingly and paid 10,000 by DD as asked earlier. The order of adjudictaion order holds good as the appeal was withdrawn

Report error