Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3459
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Shri Justice Vivek Jain, J
Ram Niwas Patel – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Criminal Case | FIR No. RC2172015A0108 | S.T. No. 740 of 2013
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents: CBI
Allegations based on vague evidence do not establish a prima facie case for prosecution, warranting quashing of the charge-sheet.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 3(2) and 13(1)(d) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 - Arms Act - Sections 25 and 27 - Madhya Pradesh Recognized Examination Act, 1937 - Quashing of charge-sheet - The applicant, accused of acting as a middleman in PMT-2013 examination, argued that allegations were vague and lacked evidence of receiving consideration for facilitating admissions. The court found no substantial evidence to support the charge and quashed the proceedings. (Paras 6, 8, 17)
(B) Criminal Conspiracy - The court emphasized that mere allegations without concrete evidence do not suffice to establish a case of conspiracy. (Paras 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was implicated in a charge-sheet concerning malpractices in the PMT-2013 examination, with allegations of acting as a middleman for arranging scorers. The charge-sheet included vague allegations without substantial proof of wrongdoing.
Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the material in the charge-sheet, even if taken at face value, did not establish a case against the applicant warranting trial.
Issues: The main issues included whether the allegations against the applicant constituted a prima facie case of an offence and whether the evidence was sufficient to proceed to trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the lack of concrete evidence and reliance on vague allegations did not meet the threshold for establishing a criminal conspiracy or any offence, thus justifying the quashing of the proceedings.
Result: Petition allowed; FIR, charge-sheet, and consequential proceedings quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the charges and allegations against the applicant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. counterarguments presented by the cbi regarding the sufficiency of evidence. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's analysis of the evidence and legal standards for quashing proceedings. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. legal standards for the exercise of extraordinary powers under section 482. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. decision to quash the proceedings based on insufficient evidence. (Para 17) |
ORDER
(Reserved on : 06/05/2025)
(Pronounced on : 16/05/2025)
Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Vivek Jain.
The present applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./Section 528 of BNSS-2023 have been filed for quashing the charge-sheet/final report submitted by the CBI and the consequential trial and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. This petition has been filed arising out of FIR No. RC2172015A0108 and consequential criminal proceedings in S.T. No. 740 of 2013 before the Special Judge (Vyapam cases) Bhopal relating to Pre Medical Test - 2013.
3. The final report / charge sheet has been presented under Sections 120-B r/w Section 420, 467, 468, 471 , 201 IPC , Sections 3(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act , Section 66r/w Section 43 of the I.T. Act and Section 4/3 (D) 1, (2) of Madhya Pradesh Recognized Examination Act , 1937.
4. The number of accused person as per para-16.1 (f) of the charge-sheet is 491. The present applicant has been alleged to be a middleman in the PMT-2013 examination wherein various malpractices have been alleged to have been carried out.
5. It is argued that the PMT examination for admission to Medical Colleges in the State used to be conducted in the manner that certain Engine candidates used to appear in the examination and the bogie candidates were those who were the actual beneficiaries. The engine and bogie candidates used to be paired by connivance of officials of M.P. Professional Examination Board (“Vyapam”). In this manner the engine candidates used to be either the solvers who sat in the examiner centre just adjacent to the bogie candidate to facilitate cheating, or the persons who used to be selected and blocked the seats so that on the last date of admissions, the bogie candidate can take admission, or in case the engine candidate were acting as solvers, in some cases they appeared in the examination for bogie candidates by impersonation. There were various other means of malpractices in PMT examination which also included manipulation in the OMR sheets of the candidates when the sheet was submitted to the examination centre and reached Vyapam office for valuation and preparation of result, and at that stage manipulation used to be carried out in the OMR sheet or in the digital data in tabulation chart.
6. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no allegation of receipt of any consideration by the present applicant and there are vague and loose allegations against the applicant of having acted as middleman for accused/racketeer Sanjeev Kumar Shilpkar and having arranged four scorers for appearing in the PMT-2013 Examination. It is argued that the allegations against the him are based on memorandum taken under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act wherein the applicant is stated to have disclosed that he came in contact with one Amit Nimawat and who had introduced him with Sanjeev Kumar Shilpkar and that he arranged 4 scorers for which Sanjeev Shilpkar had Signature Not Verified Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR paid him Rs.4,00,000/- out of which Rs.10,000/- each were paid to the 4 scorers and Rs.20,000/- to one another person who had arranged 2 scorers for him and out of balance amount Rs.2,00,000/- was given by him to his father. There was seizure of cash to the tune of Rs.10,000/-from this applicant and apart from that there i
