The vehement contention of the University Counsel
that, petitioner in his mail dated 02.03.2020 has admitted
the ‘offence of plagiarism’, is difficult to countenance;
petitioner had sent a mail of the kind vide Annexure-R5, is
true, though unfairly enough, he has not whispered about
this in the Writ Petition; it is a representation ‘to
reconsider my case’ of plagiarism and not an admission;
true it is that, there are a few stray sentences such as ‘This
is my first plagiarism violation’; however, the same is
followed by other sentences which seek to explain why it is
not a case of plagiarism; he has specifically stated that
certain things needed to be mentioned as they are and,
that would not amount to plagiarism; even in his mail
dated 28.2.2020 at Annexure-R1 to the S.O., he has
written ‘This is my first violation’; but this too is followed
by a denial in the very same paragraph.
f) It has been a long settled position of law that a
stray sentence giving the impression of admission of the
guilt shall not be interpreted in isolation when the rest of
the matter in the representations suggests the contra; one
has to gather a holistic impression from reading the entire
text and not a few sporadic sentences appearing here &
there in a script, whilst considering if what is stated
amounts to admission. An acclaimed jurist of yester
decades Mr.Rupert Cross in his treatise ‘EVIDENCE’, (3rd
Edn. London- Butterworks 1967) at page 433 states: “An
admission being any statement … which is adverse to a
party’s case, the only conditions of admissibility, when the
statement emanates from the party himself concern the
capacity in which he is acting and the reception of the
entirety of the statement…”; it is more so when one is
dealing with the educational career of young minds like the
petitioner herein; loose & lavish wording of the
representations, need to be given a due discount; the
respondent –University is not justified in seeking shelter
under a leaking umbrella of a poor student.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 9395 OF 2020 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI HRUDAY. P B Vs THE VICE CHANCELLOR, THE NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY,
DATED: 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
Print Page