Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Vijay Balaraj C vs Saladi Naga Venkata Vaibhava on 1 August, 2025

KABC030172162018




    IN THE COURT OF VII ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL
            MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.
          Dated this the 1st day of August, 2025

           Present :     Sri. Puttaraju, B.A.LLB.,
                         VII Addl. C.J.M., Bengaluru.

            JUDGMENT U/s 355 OF Cr.P.C.

                     C.C. No.6287/2018

Complainant      :     State by : Vidyaranyapura        Police
                       Station.
                       (By Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor)

                         V/s

Accused                 Saladi Naga Venkata Vaibhava,
Nos.                    S/o Janardhana Rao,
                        Aged about 23 years,
                        R/at: No.39/1/19,
                        Palakollu Village and Mandalam,
                        West Godavari District,
                        Andhra Pradesh State.


Date of occurrence of offence        04.12.2016
Date of report of offence            05.12.2016
Name of the Complainant              Vijay Balraj C
                     2                 C.C.6287/2018




Date of     Commencement      of 08.12.2023
recording Evidence
Date of Closing of Evidence      08.07.2025
Offences complained of           U/s 420, 511 of I.P.C and
                                 section 117 of Karnataka
                                 Education Act.
Opinion of the Judge             Accused has not been found
                                 guilty.



     This chargesheet is submitted by the Police Sub
Inspector of Vidyaranyapura Police Station against the
accused for the offences punishable U/s 420, 511 of
I.P.C and section 117 of Karnataka Education Act.


     2.   The case of the prosecution is that, on

04.12.2017 at about 2.30 pm to 5.30 pm, in the exam

of CAT organized by the TATA Consultant Service

Company scheduled at E-Exam Lab, situated within

the jurisdiction of Vidyaranyapura Police Station, the

accused brought HTC Company mobile with sim

No.9912277489 and was taking photo of question

paper and sending the same to CAT 2016 Bulls Eye 01

whats app group created by his friend and cheated the
                      3                  C.C.6287/2018




said Company,     thereby accused has committed the

offences punishable under sections 420, 511 of I.P.C

and section - 117 of Karnataka Education Act.

     3. After appearance of the accused, necessary

documents as relied by the prosecution, are furnished

to the accused as provided under section 207 of

Cr.P.C. Charge has been framed and same is read over

and explained to the accused. The accused pleaded not

guilty and claims to be tried. Therefore, the case was

posted for prosecution evidence.

     4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused

during the course of trial, prosecution has examined 2

witnesses as P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to

P4. So far as other charge sheet witnesses are

concerned, their presence is not secured in spite of

sufficient time. Therefore, they are dropped.


     5. After completion of prosecution evidence, the

statement of the accused was recorded under section
                      4                  C.C.6287/2018




313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has not adduced any

defense evidence on his behalf. Therefore, there is no

defense evidence on behalf of the accused.

     6. Heard the arguments of learned Senior A.P.P.

and counsel appearing for accused. The points that

would arise for my consideration are as under:


       1. Whether the prosecution proves
       beyond all reasonable doubt that, the
       accused has committed the offences
       punishable u/s 420, 511  of I.P.C and
       section - 117 of Karnataka Education
       Act. ?

       2. What order ?



     7. My answer to the above points are as under:

  Point No.1: In the Negative.

  Point No.2: As per final order, for the following:



                      REASONS

     8. Point No.1:- The contention of the prosecution

is that the accused while writing the CAT exam has
                      5                 C.C.6287/2018




sent question paper's photo to whats app group

created by his friend to get answer to the questions

and cheated the company which organized the said

exam thereby the accused has committed offences

aforesaid.


     9. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, CW.6

PSI examined as PW.1, in his evidence, though he

deposed about registration of case by receiving the

Ex.P.1 complaint from CW.1 and conducted spot

mahazar Ex.P.2 in the presence of witnesses, he did

not turn up for cross examination despite taken

coercive steps and hence PW.1 was dropped.


     10. PW.2 is the IO, in his evidence, he has stated

that he received case file from CW.6 for further

investigation and after verification of case file found

prima-facie case as alleged offence committed by

accused and hence submitted charge sheet. In the

cross examination, he denied the suggestions that
                           6             C.C.6287/2018




submitted false charge sheet against accused though

accused has not committed alleged offence.


     11. In order to bring home the guilt of accused for

the offence alleged, the prosecution has to establish

that the accused with an intention to cheat TATA

Consultant Service Company, has taken photos of

question paper and sent to whats app group created by

his friend to get the answers to the question. In the

light of above, upon careful perusal of evidence of

record, despite issued warrants and proclamation to

CW.1 to 6, they did not turn up to adduce evidence

and hence they have been dropped. So, except the

evidence of police official, nothing is on record to prove

the guilt of accused, in the absence of evidence of

material witnesses, the evidence given by police

officials is of no use.


  12. Therefore, in view of the above discussions and

reasoning, the considered opinion of the court is that
                         7                      C.C.6287/2018




the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the

accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offences

alleged against accused. Accordingly, I answer point

No.1 in the negative.


     13. Point No.2:- In view of my answer on the point

No.1, I proceed to pass the following


                             ORDER

Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C the accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s 420, 511 of I.P.C and Section-117 of Karnataka Education Act.

The bail bond and surety bond of accused stands cancelled after six months from today.

                 The        property       seized   in
            PF.No.110/2016                      dated
            04.12.2016 i.e., at Item No.1 to 3

is ordered to be return to the 8 C.C.6287/2018 concerned on proper identification.

                    The        property        seized    in
               PF.No.110/2016                       dated

04.12.2016 i.e., at Item No.4 HTC Mobile Phone is ordered to be confiscated to the State, after the appeal period is over.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript computerized by her, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this 1 st day of August, 2025) ( PUTTARAJU ) VII Addl. C.J.M., Bengaluru.

ANNEXURES List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution :

PW.1            Bhyrappa

PW.2            Puneeth


List of documents marked on behalf of prosecution :

Ex.P.1          Complaint

Ex.P.2          Seizure mahazar
                         9                        C.C.6287/2018




Ex.P.3        FIR

Ex.P.4        Spot mahazar


List of witnesses examined for the Accused               Nil.
List of documents exhibited for the Accused              Nil.
List of Material Object marked for prosecution           Nil.



VII Addl. C.J.M., Bengaluru.

10 C.C.6287/2018

Judgment pronounced in the open court.

(vide separate order):

ORDER Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C the accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s 420, 511 of I.P.C and Section-117 of Karnataka Education Act.
The bail bond and surety bond of accused stands cancelled after six months from today.
The property seized in PF.No.110/2016 dated 04.12.2016 i.e., at Item No.1 to 3 is ordered to be return to the concerned on proper identification.
The property seized in PF.No.110/2016 dated 04.12.2016 i.e., at Item No.4 HTC Mobile Phone is ordered to be confiscated to the State, after the appeal period is over.
7th ACJM, Bengaluru.