Respected Experts - I wish to place before you that my friend who was working in a senior position for more than three decades in a nationalised bank was given compulsory retirement because of his colleague’s vengeance attitude and complaint of false allegations against him which made his arrest in april 2013 on Sec 66-A of Information Technology Act, 2008. He came out on bail within 2 hours but his colleague who was influential at Head Office saw that my friend got suspended on the basis of arrest and the domestic enquiry went for one year by bank and he was given compulsory retirement in march 2014. Because of that colleague’s vengeance my friend suffered a lot as he could not get his compulsory retirement benefits even today. Regarding criminal case, my friend got total acquittal in february 2016. In the Judgment it was stated that “ As discussed earlier no document or material object was seized from the possession or from anyone to establish the case against the accused. this court has no hesitation to hold that the prosecution failed to prove the case against the accused for the offence punishable u/s 66A of ITA Act, 2008 beyond all reasonable doubt. In the result, I find that the accused is not guilty for the offence punishable U/s 66A of ITA Act, 2008 and accordingly he is acquitted as per the provisions u/s 248(1) Cr.P.C”. After this judgment my friend’s colleague who did all these mess took voluntary retirement hurriedly and got relieved from bank on 30.4.2016 though few more years is left for him. My friend is jobless as his reinstatement case is still pending in High Court since November 2014 though misc., petition is filed after his acquittal from criminal case. My friend filed a defamation case in civil court for 1.5 crores against his colleague who was complainant for his arrest and also responsible for compulsory retirement. The evidence was filed along with the petition such as Judgment copy and other testimonials which are evident about the vengeance attitude of his colleague. He returned the summons served by Hon Court and the case became ex-parte. I now request experts whether is it sufficient or any more witnesses are required to strengthen the case.