- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3509 CRL.P No. 100921 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100921 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MADHUKUMAR P. S/O. SANNA THIPPAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. NEW BLACK-5 D.NO.56, S.N PET DARLINE BALLARI, NOW R/O. ASHOKA NAGARA, 1ST CROSS, PLOT NO., SIRUGUPPA ROAD, HAVAMBHAVI, BALLARI-583101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. Y.LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE BALLARI RURAL POLICE STATION, BALLARI, BALLARI DISTRICT-583135, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. 2. DR. T.M. BHASKAR S/O. MARAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, VICE CHANCELLER, (ADMINISTRATION), VIJAYANAGARA, SRI. KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, VINAYAKA NAGARA, BALLARI, R/O. 7TH CROSS, VIDYA NAGARA, BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; SRI. J.S.SHETTY, ADV. FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN CRIMINAL CASE CC NO.141/2016 ON THE FILE OF IIIRD ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BALLARI B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.21 17:16:23 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3509 CRL.P No. 100921 of 2022 FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 27, 120 OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT, 1983, AND 406, 426 OF IPC SO FOR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN THE ABOVE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, who is facing trail for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 426 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), is before this Court seeking relief. 2. The prosecution alleges that from 15.06.2015 to 26.06.2015, the postgraduate examinations were conducted at Ballari Vijayanagar Srikrishnadevaraya University. One Jyothi appeared for four papers in the M.Sc. 4th Semester examination. 3. After the completion of the exams, the answer sheets were evaluated. During this process, two professors, Manjunatha S. and H.M. Channabasavaiah, were appointed as custodians of the answer sheets by the university. An order was also issued appointing daily wage employees to assist the custodians in packing the answer sheets. 4. On 14.06.2015, as per the Vice Chancellor’s order, the custodians appointed nine students to help them in packing the answer sheets. During this process, the petitioner allegedly destroyed and cut pages from four answer sheets belonging to Jyothi with a malafide intention to ensure her failure in the examination. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3509 CRL.P No. 100921 of 2022 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no material to substantiate that the petitioner was appointed on daily wages to assist the custodian in packing the answer sheets, as evident from the information received under the Right to Information Act. 6. She further submitted that the petitioner is a student and a classmate of Jyothi, whose answer sheets were destroyed. 7. In response, the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1/State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that, following the order passed by the Vice Chancellor, the custodians of the answer sheets appointed the petitioner and others on a daily wage basis to assist them in packing the answer sheets. 8. It was further submitted that the charge sheet materials clearly establish that the petitioner was involved in the destruction of the answer sheets with the malafide intention of causing Jyothi to fail the examination. Therefore, the veracity of the allegations should be considered at the time of trial and not at this stage. Hence, they prayed for the dismissal of the petition. 9. The arguments of the learned counsel for the parties have been duly considered. 10. A perusal of the charge sheet materials indicates that the prosecution has not produced any document to substantiate that the petitioner was appointed on a daily wage basis to assist the custodian of the answer sheets. The petitioner has annexed - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3509 CRL.P No. 100921 of 2022 information received from the University, dated 09.12.2015, indicating that neither the petitioner nor the other eight individuals were appointed on a daily wage basis. 11. The petitioner has been implicated solely based on the statements of some students who cast doubt on his involvement in the destruction of the answer sheets. The petitioner has also been implicated based on Jyothi’s voluntary statement, in which she alleged that he held animosity toward her because she rejected his advances. Except for the self-serving statements of the alleged victim, Jyothi, and the students, there is no substantial evidence to support the allegations against the petitioner, especially considering that he was not the custodian of the answer sheets. Under such circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 12. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No.141/2016 on the file of the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ballari, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79