Allowed

P.Prabhaker Rao, Medak Dt., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp.

Telangana HC6 Sept 2023CRLP/13303/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Petition challenged a suo-mou cognizance order under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act against a Head Master. Considering a resolution from the School Managing Committee and absence of a prima facie case, the court quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of orders passed by the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy in S.T.C.No.206 of 2014, with a warning to the petitioner.

P.Prabhaker Rao, Medak Dt., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp. — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13303 OF 2014

¶6

Between

¶7

P.Prabhaker Rao, S/o. Narsinga Rao , aged 48^years Occ: Head Master-ll ZPHS Bandaram Village, Kondapaka Mandal, Ivledak District.

¶8

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶9

AND

¶10

State Of Telangana, through S.H.O. Kondapaka, Medak Dist, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶11

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum oJ Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to^quash the orders passed by the Hon'ble Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at Sangareddy in STC.No. 206 of 2014 daled O4-07-2014 taking cognizance of offence against the Petitioner U/s. 23 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

¶12

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLP MP NO: 13926 OF 2014)

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay all further proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused in STC. No. 206 of 2O14, Dt. 04-072014, on the file of the Hon'ble Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at Sangareddy including personal appearance before the court, pending disposal of the Ouash Proceedings.

¶14

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P. SRIHARINATH, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Vizarath Ali Asst. Public Prosecutor on behalfofthe Respondent.

¶15

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶16

¶17

¶18

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

¶19

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 133O3 oF 2014

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the orders passed by the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Sangareddy (for short, "the trial court") in S.T.C.No.206 of 2Ol4 dated 04.O7.2014 taking cognizance of the offence against the petitioner under Section 23 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act (for short, "the JJ Act").

¶22

Heard Mr. P. Srihari Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Yizarath Ali, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that based on the paper clipping reported in Eenadu daily news paper, the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy has taken suo-mottu cognizalce of the olfence against the petitioner under Secti on 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act and registered a case as S.T.C.No.206 of 2Ol4 and issued notice to the petitioner. This Court, while admitting the matter on L7 .17.2OI4 granted interim stay of all further proceedings in

¶24

i ,] ,t l

¶25

¶26

S.T.C.No.2O6 of 2Ol4 before the trial court for a^{period of} four⁽⁴⁾ weeks and later, the interim stay was extended until further orders

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the D.E.O. had visited the place of offence i.e., Z.P.H.S. ald enquired into the matter. Learned counsel draws the attention of this Court to the resolution dated O3.O7.2O14 passed by the School Managing Committee Chairman, Z.P.H.S. Bandara, Kondapak Mandal, Medak District, wherein it was stated that they have no grievance against the Head Master, who is an accused in S.T.C.No.206 of 2014.

¶28

Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any violation of the provisions of the JJ Act and that the petitioner has not resorted or indulged in beating of pupil Praveen Kumar of 6th class who was alleged to be a victim in the case. Therefore, submitted that issuance of summons in S.T.C.No.2O6 of 2074 is against the Rules and provisions under the JJ Act. Moreover, the petitioner was suffering from mental agony due to the summons issued in S.T.C.No.206 of 20 14. He further contended that except the S.T.C., there is no other complaint registered against him and he was with a clean record

¶29

¶30

\ \

¶31

throughout his career. He submitted that there '*'as no prima facie^{case made out against him and continuationofthe} proceedings is sheer abuse of the process of law. Therefore, seeks to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.206 of 2OI4

¶32

¶33

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that being the Head Master, the petitioner ought not to have behaved in an indecent manner and ought not to have beaten the student who was at a tender age. Therefore, submitted that the real facts would be elicited only upon conducting a fulfledged trial. Hence, seeks to dismiss the Criminal Petition

¶34

7 . Having regard to the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on taking into consideration, the resolution dated 03.O7.2014 passed by the School Managing Committee Chairman, Z.P.H.S. Bandara, Kondapak Mandal, Medak District, since no other complaint has been registered against the petitioner except the suo mottu complaint herein, this Court is inclined to quash the orders passed by the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Sangareddy in S.T.C.No.206 of 2014 against the petitioner, by warning him not to resort to such kind of behaviour in future being the Head Master of the School

¶35

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed

¶36

¶37

¶38

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

Sd/-G.SIRREESHA ASSITANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1.. The Additional Judicial First Class^{Magistrateat Sangareddy Medak District.}

¶44

The Station House Officer, Kondapaka^{PoliceStation, Medak Diskict.}

¶45

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High^{Court for} the^{Stateof Telanganaat} Hyderabad. (OUT)

¶46

One CC to SRl. PALLE SRIHARINATH Advocate [OPUC]

¶47

Two CD Copies

(l?

HIGH COURT

DATED:0610912023

ORDER

CRLP.No.13303 of 2014

¶53

1rE SrA I€
2'
l!:
lt';\ r'. 1 $ [Cr 2023 .1,'.,-
.:. :'
I

¶54

ALLOWING TI{E CRL.PETITION

¶55

@r,,;r

P.Prabhaker Rao, Medak Dt., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Prabhaker Rao, Medak Dt., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp.

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

Ambati Venkateshwar Reddy, Vs the State of A.P. Rep., by Its Pp

Gundelly Mallesh Vs the State of A.P

Madini Philips , Philip Vs the State of A.P.

Banoth Bhadru Naik Vs Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi

A.Chandrasekhar , Shekar, Ramnagar, Hyderabad Vs the State of A.P. Rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Hyd and Anr.

Chintala Arjun Kumar , Arjun, Warangal Vs State of a.P., Rep. by Pp., High Court