THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.23479 of 2018

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 3 for seeking quash in C.C.No.727 of 2018 on the file of learned 23^rd Metropolitan Magistrate, Rajendranagar, Cyberabad registered for the offences punishable under Section 82 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (Hereafter referred as the Act).

2. Heard Mr. Naumene Surapraj Karapalem raparaj, learned counsel for the petitioner through video conference, Mr.Ch.Venkat Raman appeared on behalf of respondent No.3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on behalf of respondent No.1 and 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they were falsely implicated even according to the allegations made either in the complaint or in the chargesheet and it does not attract Section 82 of the Act. The only allegation made against the petitioners is that when the L.W1 came to the school without wearing shoes and they have punished the L.W1 by keeping him in the library room. Though the petitioner’s intention is that to maintain discipline and the dress code, they have informed the LW1 to come to school in school uniform and by wearing shoes. Hence, the offence under Section 82 of the act is not attracted.

4. He further submitted that the investigation Officer, without properly conducting the investigation, filed a final report and the learned Magistrate also without verifying the provisions of the Act took cognizance. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings is clearly an abuse of process of law. In support of his contention he relied upon the order dated 7.10.2024 passed in Crl.MC.No. 2948 of 2022 by the High Court of Kerala.

5. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submitted that there are specific allegations are levelled against the petitioners that they harassed the LW1 mentally and physically and the investigating officer after recording the statement of the witnesses filed a final report and the learned Magistrate has rightly took the cognizance. He further submitted that whether the petitioners have committed the offences or not and the same has to be revealed after full fledged trial and the petitioners are not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has also reiterated same submissions made by learned counsel for Respondent No.3.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is revealed that when the L.W1 who is the son of the respondent No.3 attended the school without wearing appropriate shoes, petitioner No.1 while discharging her duties as a school coordinator warned the LW1 to come to school wearing appropriate shoes and come to school. Hence, the provisions of Section 82 of the Act are not attracted.

8. In Crl.M.C. No. 2948 of 2022, the Kerala High Court, while adjudicating a similar case, where an 8th-standard student was asked to change from colored clothes into the school uniform, for which the prosecution alleged, the student was mental harassed. The court held that insisting on a uniform for maintaining school discipline does not amount to cruelty or cause unnecessary mental or physical suffering to a child as contemplated under Section 75. The Court further observed that treating such disciplinary actions as criminal offences would undermine school discipline and found that no prima facie case was made out, thereby quashing the final report and all further proceedings.

9. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is clearly an abuse of process of law. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.727 of 2018 on the file of learned 23rd Metropolitan Magistrate, Rajendranagar, Cyberabad are hereby q