Allowed

Kurre Radhakrishna Reddy @ v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2024CRL.P/6021/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of orders rejecting their discharge application in a case over running a school without valid affiliation. Relying on a Division Bench decision holding such rejection to be an intermediate order amenable to revision, the High Court allowed the petition and remanded the revision petition for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Revisional court's order set aside; revision petition remanded for consideration; interim order continued till disposal of the revision petition.

Kurre Radhakrishna Reddy @ Vs State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6021 OF 2018

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KURRE RADHAKRISHNA REDDY @ KRK REDDY, S/O K. SUBBAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/AT E-305, VASAVI DREAMS, CZECH COLONY, SANATH NAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 018 TELANGANA

¶8

Digitally signed by NARAYANAPPA LAKSHMAMMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶9

SURENDRA BABU U., S/O SUBBARAYUDU AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.1-8-50 NORTH KAMALANAGAR KUSHAIGOODA HYDERABAD-500 018 TALANGANA

¶10

DURGA W/O K. RADHAKIRSHNA REDDY, R/AT E-305 & 405 VASAVI DREAMS APARTMENT, CZECH COLONY, SANATH NAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 018 TELANGANA

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. K.B. MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH CCB POLICE, W & N SQUAD, N.T. PET, BENGALURU-02, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 02.07.2018, PASSED BY THE LXVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-67) IN CRL.RP.NO.914/2016, AND ORDER DATED 27.10.2016 PASSED BY THE I ACMM, BANGALORE AND THEREBY DISCHARGE THE PETITIONERS FROM THE CASE IN C.C.NO.13664/2015, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 418,420 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 18 OF THE RIGHT OF CHILDREN TO FREE AND COMPULSORY EDUCATION ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ACMM, BANGALORE.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioners are before this court seeking for the following

¶22

relief's:

¶23

a) WHEREFORE, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this Criminal Petition, quash the Order dated 02.07.2018 passed by the LXVI Addl.City Civil

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶25

and Sessions Judge, Bangalore (CCH-67) in Crl.Rev.Pet.No.914/2016 and Order dated 27.10.2016 passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and thereby discharge the petitioners from the case in CC 13664/2015 for offences punishable under Secs.418, 420 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.18 of the Right of Children to Fee and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 pending on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶26

The Deputy Director of Public Instructions had lodged a complaint on 23.10.2014 before the Jalahalli Police Station alleging the office bearers of Sri Goutham Academy of General and Technical Education Society are running a school, without valid affiliation from the Central Government. In furtherance of which investigation carried out and a final report submitted by the Central Crime Branch against the petitioners for offences punishable under sections 418 and 420 R/w section 34 of the IPC and section 18(5) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

¶27

An application for discharge under section 239 of Cr.P.C having been filed by the petitioners came to be rejected vide order dated 27.10.2016 by the Ist Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bengaluru in CC No.13664/2015, challenging the same, petitioners had

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶29

filed a revision petition under section 397 of Cr.P.C, in Criminal Revision petition No.914/2016 before the LXVI^th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH-67). The said revision petition came to be dismissed by the revisional Court, holding that revision petition was not maintainable insofar as an application for discharge filed under section 239 of Cr.P.C, has been rejected.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on a judgment dated the 10.10.2018 of the Division Bench of this Court in criminal petition No.2721/2017 and other connected matters in the

¶31

case of Syed Ifthekar Ahmed Vs. The State of Karnataka Lokayuktha and others¹ more particularly "para Nos.40, 41 and 42" thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:

¶32

40. With the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court, the twin issues referred to this Bench are no longer res integra. To answer the second issue first, an order framing the charge, or the order refusing to discharge the accused, or the order dismissing an application for discharge, such an order is not an interlocutory order. In fact, such an order is an intermediate order. Therefore, such an order is not hit by the bar contained in Section 397 (2) Cr. P. C.

¶33

1 Criminal Petition No.2721/2014, C/w. Criminal Petition Nos.2320/2017, 4527/2017, 4526/2017 and 4528/2017.

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶35

41. Thus, the answer to the first issue is that such an order is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 (1) Cr. P. C.

¶36

42. In fact, to go a step further, as pronounced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, an order of such a nature can be challenged either under Section 397 (1), or under Section 482 Cr. P. C; such an order can also be challenged under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. For, the nomenclature used to describe the petition is immaterial.

¶37

By relying on the above, he submits that this Court has come to a categorical conclusion that there is no bar under section 397 of Cr.PC insofar as dismissal of an application for discharge, since such an order is not an interlocutory order, but is an intermediate order. In view of such judgment of this Court as also of the Hon'ble apex Court, I am of the consider opinion that the impugned order dated 02.07.2018 passed in criminal revision petition No.914/2016 is not sustainable. As such, the present petition is require to be allowed. I pass the following order:

¶38

:ORDER:

¶39

i. The present petition is allowed.

¶40

ii. The order dated 02.07.2018 in criminal revision petition No. 914/2016 passed by the LXVI Additional City Civil and Session Judge

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:19517 CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018

¶42

Bangalore City (CCH-67) is set aside the matter is remanded to the said Court for consideration of the revision petition filed by the petitioner in terms of decision dated 10.10.2018 in criminal petition No.2721/2017 and other connected matters.

¶43

iii. The registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the LXVI Additional City Civil and Session Judge Bangalore City (CCH-67).

¶44

iv. Since the order is passed before the both counsel who are present before this court, they shall appear before the aforementioned Court without requirement of any notice on 03.07.2024.

¶45

v. Interim order granted earlier will continue till the disposal of the criminal revision petition.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

ASN

¶48

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9

Kurre Radhakrishna Reddy @ v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kurre Radhakrishna Reddy @ v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Gowri Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Dejappa Mugulia Vs Sri Gunapala

Sri H.J. Sathynarayana Vs H.J. Padmanabha

Venkateshegowda Vs Sri K N Ramesh Rao

R S Chandrashekaraiah Vs Shivamma

Smt Savithramma W/O Hucha Naika Vs Sri Ganapathi S/O Hucha Naika