The Karnataka High Court last week took decisive action against police officers responsible for submitting a false charge sheet against two students, ordering disciplinary proceedings against them. The case dragged on for over five years and caused immense personal and professional damage to the students involved. On September 10, a bench led by Justice M Nagaprasanna quashed the false charges and called out the grave lapses in police procedure that led to the wrongful accusations.
The case began when a probationary police officer lodged a complaint accusing two students of consuming ganja (marijuana) in Bengaluru, under the jurisdiction of Varthur Police Station. Despite forensic tests conducted by the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) showing no traces of ganja in the students’ blood samples, the police proceeded with filing a charge sheet against them. Frustrated by the unjust charges, the students eventually approached the High Court to clarify their names.
Representing the students, their legal counsel argued that the charge sheet directly contradicted the FSL findings, asserting that the police had wrongly framed them. As a result of the false accusations, the students lost several career opportunities and could not travel abroad due to travel restrictions imposed during the investigation.
The government’s legal representatives acknowledged the irregularities, particularly noting that although the panchnama—a formal record of the seized substance—claimed 15 grams of ganja had been confiscated, the substance was never sent for forensic analysis. This oversight violated the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, under which the students were charged, further undermining the legitimacy of the case.
The students’ lawyers contended that the panchnama had been deliberately falsified, and proper procedures under Section 50 of the NDPS Act—which requires searches to be conducted in the presence of a magistrate or gazetted officer—were not followed. In this case, no such officer was present during the seizure, making the process illegal.
Justice Nagaprasanna’s bench severely criticised the handling of the case by the police, stating that the absence of proper forensic analysis and the lack of adherence to legal protocols rendered the case against the students deeply suspect. The court remarked, “The uncontested facts reveal that the alleged ganja was neither sent for forensic examination nor seized in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, as required by law. There is no clarity on what happened to the 15 grams of ganja mentioned in the panchnama. The entire claim regarding the seizure is dubious and lacks credibility.”
Additionally, the court raised concerns over the police’s failure to produce the officer who filed the complaint as a witness, further casting doubt on the investigation’s integrity. The court noted that the actions of the Station House Officer, Investigating Officer, and the officer who prepared the mahazar (documentation of the seizure) jeopardised the students’ futures, and they could not evade accountability for the damage caused.
In response to the court’s findings, Justice Nagaprasanna ordered a departmental inquiry against the officers responsible for the false charge sheet. This investigation is intended to hold them accountable for their actions and restore justice for the students who suffered due to the wrongful accusations.
In a related case in Bengaluru, four police officers were suspended for wrongfully arresting two individuals in a separate drug-peddling case. These suspensions, which occurred on September 12, resulted from an investigation that revealed the officers acted on false information provided by an informant who had a personal vendetta against the accused.
The suspended officers—PSI Sridhar Gugri, ASI Raju SK, and constables Satish Bagali and Timmanna Poojar—were all attached to the Banashankari police station. They were found to have collaborated with the informant, Rajan, a man in his 50s, who had orchestrated the arrests. Rajan, with the help of his younger accomplice Chaitra, planted drugs on the two men, Behru Singh and his relative, as part of a personal revenge plot. Rajan’s daughter had recently eloped with her lover, and Rajan suspected that Singh’s cousin had facilitated their escape, which led him to seek revenge by framing Singh.
According to the police report, the officers claimed they received credible information from Rajan on August 9, alleging that drug peddling was taking place in Banashankari. Based on this tip, the police apprehended Singh and his relative, claiming they had caught them in possession of drugs. The officers reported using a local person as a decoy to confirm the drug sale, with Rajan acting as the informant, who claimed the suspects were selling opium. The arrests were made under Section 17(a) of the NDPS Act, which deals with punishment for offences related to prepared opium.
However, the investigation soon revealed that Rajan had orchestrated the arrests out of revenge. He and Chaitra had planted opium on the men’s vehicles before tipping off the police. Following this revelation, both Singh and his relative were released on bail, and the informant and his accomplice were also arrested for their role in the false charges.
