- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 421 OF 2020 BETWEEN: DR. RAVIKUMAR B C S/O. CHANNAKESHAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, DIRECTOR, HASSAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M., SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUYOG HERELE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HASSAN CITY POLICE REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001 2. C.V. MOHANRAJ S/O. VENKATARAM, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, CHOWDENAHALLI VILLAGE, KATTAYA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT - 573 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. DEEPAK S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.01.2020 PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.1079/2014 (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) ON THE FILE OF Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., HASSAN, THEREBY REGISTERING THE CRIMINAL CASE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 417, 420, 426, 465, 468, 471, 474 AND 120(B) R/W 149 OF IPC AND ISSUING SUMMONS TO THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.1 is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in Crime No.349/2014 (PCR No.1079/2014) of Hassan City Police Station, now pending in C.C.No.279/2020 on the file of learned Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 426, 465, 468, 471, 474, 120-B read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 as complainant filed the private complaint in PCR.No.1079/2014 against the petitioner and others alleging commission of the offences as stated above. It is the specific contention of the complainant that the accused who was working as a Professor - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 in the Department of Dermatology in Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences (HIMS), managed to get a fake service certificate with the help of other accused for getting higher post. It is stated that even though the petitioner had never served as Assistant Professor in Sulya Medical College from 25.01.2001 till 21.02.2002, Associate Professor from 22.02.2002 to 24.02.2006, and Professor from 25.05.2006 to 30.06.2006, managed to get such certificate from accused No.2 and thereby committed the offences as stated above. 3. On the basis of the allegations made in the private complaint, learned Magistrate referred the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.PC. Accordingly, crime No.349/2014 of Hassan City Police Station came to be registered. After investigation, the police filed B Report. The sworn statement of the complainant was recorded by the learned Magistrate. Based on the sworn statement and the materials on record, learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences, registered criminal case in C.C.No.279/2020 and issued summons to the accused. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 4. Heard Sri. Aruna Shyam M., learned Senior Advocate for Sri. Suyog Herele, learned for the petitioner, Smt.Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. Deepak S. Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the materials on record. 5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" My answer to the above point is in the 'affirmative' for the following: REASONS 6. It is the specific contention of respondent No.2 that accused No.1 managed to get concocted fake service certificate with the help of co-accused to get the higher post, even though he never served as Assistant Professor or Associate Professor or Professor in any other Institutions from 25.01.2001 till 30.01.2006. Based on such fake certificate, he managed to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 officiate the post as Professor in Department of Dermatology in HIMS and thereby committed the offences as stated above. 7. It is the contention of learned Senior advocate for the petitioner that, on making similar allegations against the petitioner, a departmental enquiry was initiated, where he was exonerated. The similar complaint was filed with Karnataka Lokayuktha Police and detailed investigation was undertaken. Later the petitioner was exonerated. Not being satisfied with the same, similar complaint was made to the Medical Council of India and also to the Committee specially constituted for that purpose. The Medical Council and the Committee also held enquiry and nothing was found to substantiate the contention now taken by the complainant. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for respondent No.2. 8. Learned Senior advocate placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mariam Fasihuddin and Another v. State by Adugodi Police Station and Another1 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court referring to its early decision in 1 2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 Radheshyam Kejriwal v. State of West Bengal2, held as under: "39. In our opinion, therefore, the yardstick would be to judge as to whether the allegation in the adjudication proceedings as well as the proceeding for prosecution is identical in the adjudication proceedings as well as the proceeding for prosecution is identical and the exoneration of the person concerned in the adjudication proceedings is on merits. In case it is found on merit that there is no contravention of the provisions of the Act in the adjudication proceedings, the trial of the person concerned shall be an abuse of the process of the court." 9. When initiation of other similar proceedings on the same set of allegations is not disputed by the respondent, it is the contention of the learned Senior advocate that similar allegations are already considered at various forums, wherein the petitioner was exonerated. There were several criminal complaints based on the same set of facts where in the petitioner is exonerated from the charge. Under such circumstances registration of one more complaint with identical allegations is an abuse of process of law. 2 2011 (3) SCC 598 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8526 CRL.P No. 421 of 2020 10. In view of the above, I answer the above point in the ‘affirmative’ and proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) Criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Crime No.349/2014 (PCR No.1079/2014) registered by Hassan City Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 426, 465, 468, 471, 474, 120-B read with Section 149 of IPC, is quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE MKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17