Allowed

Dr. v. Suresh S/O R Venugopal v State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Oct 2023CRL.P/102849/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Petition sought quashing of FIR and charge sheet against Dr. V. Suresh under various IPC and Karnataka Education Act sections. The Court allowed the petition by following a co-ordinate bench judgment that quashed proceedings against a similar student accused, finding the Education Act inapplicable to Medical Council institutions.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition was allowed and the proceedings in Special Case No.126/2012 pending on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Ballari, stand quashed qua the petitioner.

Dr. v. Suresh S/O R Venugopal Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11777 CRL.P No. 102849 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102849 OF 2022 (482-)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

DR. V. SURESH S/O R VENUGOPAL

¶8

AGE.44 YEARS, OCC.DOCTOR/ASSISTANT PROFESSOR VIMS R/O.INDRA NAGAR, KOLAGALL ROAD,

¶9

1ST CROSS BALLARI-583101

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH CID, BENGALURU, COWL BAZAR P.S., REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD-580001

¶14

THE REGISTRAR

¶15

Digitally signed by VISHAL VISHAL NINGAPPA NINGAPPA PATTIHAL PATTIHAL Date: 2023.10.10 11:28:32 +0530

¶16

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE KARNATAKA, 9TH -T-BLOCK-JAYA-NAGAR BENGALURU-560009

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1. BY SRI. GANGADHAR J.M., ADVOCATE FOR R2.)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE COMPLAINT, FIR IN CRIME NO.56/2011 REGISTERED BY COWL BAZAR POLICE STATION, BALLARY, CHARGE SHEET IN SPL.C.NO.126/2012 REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 120(B), 417, 418, 420, 465, 468, 109, 114, 161 OF IPC AND SECTION 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 138 OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT 1983 AND U/S 13(1) (C), 13(1) (d) R/W 13 (2) OF P.C. ACT 1988 AND SUBSEQUENT ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE DATED 20.12.2012 AND ALL

¶20

¶21

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11777 CRL.P No. 102849 of 2022

¶22

FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THEREIN IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.26 HEREIN.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in Spl.C.No.126/2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 418, 420, 465, 468, 109, 114, 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 and 138 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 and Sections 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel Sri. Neelendra D. Gunde appearing for the petitioner, the learned High Court Government Pleader Sri. V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel Sri. Gangadhar J.M. appearing for respondent No.2.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶28

submits that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court qua accused No.22, a student, has quashed the proceedings in

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11777 CRL.P No. 102849 of 2022

¶30

¶31

Criminal Petition No.101374/2022. In the light of the quashment of the proceedings, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner-accused No.26 stands on the same footing as of accused No.22.

¶32

Therefore, I deem it appropriate to follow the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in Criminal Petition No.101374/2022 and obliterate the proceedings against the petitioner as well. The Co-ordinate bench qua accused No.22 has held as follows:

¶33

“ The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent No.1. Sri Shivakumar S.Badawadagi, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent No.2.

¶34

2. The petitioner/accused No.22 has sought quashing of the proceedings initiated against him in Special Case No.126/2012 (Crime No.56/20211) pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge Court, Ballari, for the offences punishable under Sections 117 and 121 of Karnataka Education Act, 1983, read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶35

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as on the date of the alleged incident, the

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11777 CRL.P No. 102849 of 2022

¶38

petitioner was a student who had appeared for PGET examination and charge sheet has been filed for the offences of malpractice and copying in the examinations. He further submits that the provisions of the Karnataka Education Act are not applicable to institutions or examinations which are conducted or covered under the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act. Hence, the charge sheet filed for the offence punishable under the provisions of the Education Act as against the petitioner-accused No.22 is one without jurisdiction. He further submits that charge sheet filed against accused No.1 has been set aside by this Court in Crl.P.No.101258/2022 and as such the charge sheet filed against the petitioner-accused No.22 cannot be continued.

¶39

4. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 does not dispute that this Court in Crl.P.No.101258/2022 has quashed the impugned proceedings as against the accused No.1.

¶40

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for parties.

¶41

6. The provisions of the Karnataka Education Act are not applicable to the institutions covered under the Medical Council Act. Even otherwise, as this Court in Crl.P.No.101258/2022 has quashed the impugned proceedings as against the accused No.1,

¶42

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11777 CRL.P No. 102849 of 2022

¶43

to maintain parity and also to prevent abuse of process of law, the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.22 requires to be quashed.

¶44

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner-accused No.22 in Special Case No.126/2012 pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, is hereby quashed.

¶45

In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of as they do not survive for consideration.

¶46

The learned counsel Sri. Gangadhar J.M. would though seek to refute the submissions to contend that the student is the beneficiary of fraud and therefore, the crime should not be quashed against him, would though in the first blush stand to reason, but the Co-ordinate Bench quashing the proceedings qua accused No.22 would enure to the benefit of the petitioner in the subject petition, accused No.26.

¶47