The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to provide sufficient evidence to establish the charges under the relevant acts and sections. The judgment emphasized the duty of the appellate court to independently re-appreciate the evidence and arrive at an independent finding based on the appraisal of such evidence.

JUDGMENT

1. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed against them in C.C.No.828/2013 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chitradurga and confirmation of the same by the Special II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga in Crl.A.Nos.25/2015 and 27/2015, accused Nos.1 to 6 have preferred the above petitions.

2. The petitioners in Crl.R.P.No.710/2017 are accused Nos.1, 3 to 5, petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.665/2017 is accused No.2 and Crl.R.P.No.883/217 is accused No.6 in the said case. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred according to their ranks before the trial Court.

3. The accused were prosecuted in C.C.No.1664/2011 for the offences punishable under Sec. 120-B, 420 readwith Sec. 34 of IPC and Ss. 118, 119, 120 of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 ('the KE Act' for short) on the basis of the charge sheet filed by Chitradurga Town Police in Crime No.214/2011 of their police station.

4. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

(i) The accused with an intention to make wrongful gain conspired to prepare the answer sheets of the question paper for the subject Electricals of ITI course examination to be held on 25/7/2011. In execution of such conspiracy the accused secured the question papers as per Ex.P4 to P23 and answer sheets as per Ex.P24 to 47.

(ii) On the basis of credible information of accused attempting to sell the answer sheets near the examination centre, PW.3 the Police Inspector, DCIB, Chitradurga intercepted the car of the accused bearing Registration No.KA-16 B 6400 near National Hotel at 10.00 am. He apprehended the accused and on their search Exs.P4 to 47 were recovered from them. He seized the same under the Mahazar Ex.P1 in the presence of PWs.1 and 2. During such mahazar he also seized M.Os.1 to 8 the plastic cover containing Ex.P4 to 47, 6 mobile phones of the accused and cash of Rs.19,300.00. The car in question was also seized.

(iii) Then PW.3 verified Exs.P4 to 23 by securing the question papers through the Principal of Government ITI Women's College. The said principal secured them through Tahsildar from Treasury. On verification it was found that Exs.P4 to 23 were Xerox copies of original question papers. In that regard, he secured the report from the Principal of the College as per Ex.P3. PW.3 with all those records submitted the complaint/report as per Ex.P2 before PW.5 the PSI of Chitradurga Town Police Station.

5. On the basis of such complaint, PW.5 registered the FIR Ex.P50. He conducted the investigation and filed the charge sheet. PWs.4 and 6 at the relevant time were working as Head Constable and Constable in DCIB, Chitradurga. They accompanied PW.3 during the raid and recovery of Exs.P4 to 47 and M.Os.1 to 8 and attested their signatures to the mahazar Ex.P1.

6. The trial Court on taking cognizance of the aforesaid offence conducted the trial. After hearing the parties, the trial Court by the judgment and order dtd. 28/5/2015 acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 118, 119 and 120 of the KE Act. However, the trial Court convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 120-B, 420 read with Sec. 34 IPC. Further the trial Court sentenced the accused to the aforesaid offences as follows:

7. The trial Court held that though the mahazar witnesses PWs.1 and 2 did not support the prosecution case, the evidence of PW.3 the complainant, PWs.4 and 6 members of raiding squad was credible and that evidence was further corroborated by the evidence of Investigating Officer PW.5. The trial Court held that the apprehension of the accused and seizure was not within the distance of