Karnataka High Court
Kurre Radhakrishna Reddy @ vs State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2024
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6021 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
1. 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
2. SURENDRA BABU U.,
S/O SUBBARAYUDU
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1-8-50
NORTH KAMALANAGAR
Digitally signed KUSHAIGOODA
by
NARAYANAPPA HYDERABAD-500 018
LAKSHMAMMA TALANGANA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. DURGA
W/O K. RADHAKIRSHNA REDDY,
R/AT E-305 & 405
VASAVI DREAMS APARTMENT,
CZECH COLONY, SANATH NAGAR,
HYDERABAD-500 018
TELANGANA
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K.B. MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
CRL.P No. 6021 of 2018
AND:
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.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)
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.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this court seeking for the following
relief's:
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
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
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.
2. 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.
3. 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
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
filed a revision petition under section 397 of Cr.P.C, in
Criminal Revision petition No.914/2016 before the LXVIth
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.
4. 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
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:
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.
1 Criminal Petition No.2721/2014, C/w. Criminal Petition Nos.2320/2017, 4527/2017,
4526/2017 and 4528/2017.
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
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.
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.
4. 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:
:ORDER:
i. The present petition is allowed.
ii. The order dated 02.07.2018 in criminal
revision petition No. 914/2016 passed by the
LXVI Additional City Civil and Session Judge
NC: 2024:KHC:19517
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.
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).
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.
v. Interim order granted earlier will continue till
the disposal of the criminal revision petition.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ASN
