Bombay High Court
Rahul Raju Nawande vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso ... on 9 October, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:10546-DB
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 831 OF 2024
1. Rahul Raju Nawande,
Aged 30 Yrs., Occ.: Business,
R/o. Chaprasi Pura, Camp
Amravati, Ta. & Dist.
Amravati APPLICANT
// V E R S U S //
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Nandgaon Peth,
Amravati
2. Mayur s/o Ravindra Badgujar,
Age 33 years, Occu.:- Manager
R/o- Jhanda Chowk, Raja Peth
Amravati
NON-APPLICANTS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A.S. Mardikar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Digvijay Singh, Advocate for the
applicant.
Ms Shamsi Haider, APP for non-applicant No. 1/State.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J. AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 30.09.2025
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON :- 09.10.2025
J U D G M E N T :
(PER : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
1. Heard.
2. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
counsel for the parties.
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
3. This is an application seeking quashing and setting
aside of First Information Report bearing No.63/2024 dated
21.02.2024 registered with Police Station Nandgaon Peth District
Amravati for the offences punishable under Section 7 of The
Maharashtra Prevention of Malpractices at University, Board and
other Specified Examinations Act, 1982 (for short, ' Maharashtra
Act No.XXXI of 1982') and Section 66(D) of Information
Technology Act, 2000 (for short 'the I. T. Act') read with Sections
417, 420, 468, 471, 201 and 120 of the Indian Penal Code (for
short, 'I.P.C.'). The applicant further press for setting aside charge-
sheet/ final report bearing No.56/2024 dated 25.06.2024 filed by
non-applicant No.1 before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Amravati in Regular Criminal Case No.926/2024.
4. As per the said First Information Report on
21.02.2024, in between 9.00 a.m. and 11 a.m., examination for the
post of Soil and Water Conservation Department, Group B, Non-
gazetted Officers was conducted.
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
5. The applicant is the proprietor of ARN Associate and
provides infrastructure for conducting the said examination which
includes the space for conducting the said examination. It is
noteworthy to mention that said examination was conducted by
Maharashtra Public Service Commission (M.P.S.C.) through Tata
Consultancy Services at ARN Associate, Dreamland Nandgaon Peth
Amravati. The present applicant is the owner of ARN Associate.
7. During the said examination one of the accused
namely Yash Anant Kaware was found with xerox copy of admission
card having 40 answers of non-technical and 60 answers of technical
questions thereby making total 100 answers written on the said
examination form in the form of A, B, C and D. Accordingly, the
said person was detained by the invigilators and later on was
arrested for offence punishable under Section 7 of the Maharashtra
Act No.XXXI of 1982.
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
8. It is further transpired during the investigation that the
accused namely Yash Anant Kaware, Kishor Dongare, Rahul
Linghot and others were arrested and were sent into police custody
and subsequently, they were released on bail. On the basis of these
allegations, the FIR was lodged as stated above and accused was
arrayed therein. It is this FIR which is challenged in the present
application.
9. We have heard Mr. A.S. Mardikar, learned Senior
Advocate along with Mr. D. Singh, counsel for the applicant and
Ms Shamsi Haider learned APP for the State.
10. Mr. A.S. Mardikar, learned Senior Advocate has taken
us through the provisions of Maharashtra Act No.XXXI of 1982
and more particularly Section 7 thereof which is a penal provision.
He submits that the only role attributed to the present applicant is
providing of infrastructure for the said examination and he is no
way concerned with the malpractices/copying which happened
allegedly during the said examination. He further submits that even
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
the investigation carried out by the prosecution and the statements
recorded therein do not show any act on the part of the present
applicant which would attract the offences mentioned in the FIR
and charge-sheet. He therefore, submits that no offence is made
out and therefore, the continuance of prosecution against the
applicant is nothing but an abuse of process of Court. He therefore,
submits that FIR and consequent charge-sheet is liable to be
quashed.
11. On the other hand Ms Shamsi Haider, learned APP
opposed the contentions raised by the learned Senior Advocate. She
states that investigating officer has recorded the statement of
witnesses during which name of other 13 accused persons were
revealed. She further states that the investigation agency has also
collected CDR and SDR of the mobile of the accused persons which
show that the present applicant has used duplicate sim card and he
was in constant touch with the co-accused. Thus, learned APP
states that prima-facie case is made out against the accused and she
prays for dismissal of the present application.
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
12. In the light of these materials we have perused the FIR
and charge-sheet filed on record.
13. Before proceeding with the present matter it would be
relevant to advert to the relevant provision under Section 7 of
Maharashtra Act No.XXXI of 1982. The said act was brought into
force for curbing the malpractices at University Board and at other
specific examinations. Section 7 is the penal provision which reads
as under:-
"Whoever is found in or near an examination hall by the
invigilator or any other person appointed to supervise the
conduct of the examination, copying answers to the
question paper set at the examination, from any book,
notes or answer papers of other candidates, or appearing at
the examination for any other candidate or using any other
unfair means, shall, on conviction, be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months,
or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or
with both".
14. Meaningful reading of the said provision would reveal
that whoever is found in or near examination hall by the invigilator
or any other person who is appointed to supervise conduct of the
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
examination copying answers to the question paper set from any
book, notes or answer papers of the other candidates, or appearing
at the examination for any other candidate or using any unfair
means shall on conviction, be punished as prescribe in that section.
15. It is, therefore, imperative that a persons should be
found copying answers of the question paper from any book or
answer papers of other candidates or using any other unfair means.
As can be seen from the charge-sheet and the supporting material
nothing of such sort has been attributed to the present applicant.
The only overt act attributed to the applicant is that he made
available his place for conducting the examination in question.
16. It is therefore, clear that no material has been placed on
record so as to attract the offence under Section 7 of the
Maharashtra Act No.XXXI of 1982 against the present applicant.
17. As far as offences punishable under Sections 417, 420,
468, 201 and 120 of the Indian Penal Code are concerned there is
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
not even iota of averment in the FIR and consequent charge-sheet
to connect present applicant to the said offences. There is no
material on record to show that the applicant cheated and
dishonestly induced delivery of property. Also there is no forgery as
contemplated under Section 468. As far as offence under Section
66-D of the I. T. Act is concerned nothing has been stated or no
material has been placed on record to bring home the said offence as
far as present applicant is concerned, since their is no cheating by
personation by using computer resource as contemplated under the
Section. In fact the prosecution has admitted in its affidavit that the
whole premises was under the control of Tata Consultancy Services.
Even the statements of witnesses recorded by the prosecution do not
name the applicant.
18. It would be, therefore, an abuse of process of Court to
continue the proceedings as far as present applicant is concerned.
We are supported in our view by the celebrated judgment of State of
Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and
more particularly paragraph No.102 which read thus:
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
"(1) Where the allegations made in the First
Information report or the complaint, even if they are taken
at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not
prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case
against the accused.
(2)....................
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in
the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support
of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence
and make out a case against the accused.
(4) ................
(5)................
(6)...............
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifested
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking
vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him
due to private and personal grudge."
19. In that view of the matter, we pass the following
order:-
ORDER
i. The criminal application is allowed.
ii. The FIR No 63/2024 dated 21.02.2024 for the
offences punishable under Section 7 of Maharashtra Act No.XXXI
of 1982 and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000
read with Section 417, 420, 468, 471, 201 and 120 of the IPC
registered with Police Station Nandgaon Peth District Amravati and
945 apl 831.24.odt..doc
charge-sheet/final report bearing No.56/2024 dated 25.06.2024
filed by non-applicant No.1 before learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Amravati bearing RCC No.926/2024 is hereby quashed and
set aside to the extent of applicant Rahul Raju Nawande.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
[ NANDESH S. DESHPANDE J] [URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.]
manisha
Signed by: Mrs. Manisha Shewale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 10/10/2025 10:26:15
