The High Court · 2025

by its Trustee Smt.K.Saritha w/o IVr.K.T.lVahi. .....PETITIONERS AND '1 . State of Telangana, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Home Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Station House Officer, I\,4oinabad Police Station Cyberabad, Hyderabad 3. Smt. Vani Chekuri. W/o. Suresh Babu Kotha, aged 37 years, Occ. Home lVlaker, R/o. 1206, Block Amber, [\,4yhome Jewel, [/iyapur, Cyberabad, State of Telangana. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Charge Sheet in CC No. 727 of 2018 of the Court of the Honourable 23rd l\,4etropolitan [Vlagistrate, Rajender Nagar, Cyberabad as ab,use of the process of the Law, Arbitr:rry and illegal aqdt' conseq uently quash the same. l.A.NO:1 OF 2018 Petition Uncler Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir:umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court m: y be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC No. 727 ot 2O1B on the file of the Court of the Honourable 23rd Metropolitan Magistrate, Rajender Nagar, ()vberabad including appearance of the l st Petitioner/1 st Accused pending dispos,, I of the writ petition. |.A.NO:2 OF 2018 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir-:umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour rnay be pleased to extend the interim order dated 'l 0-07-2018 in l.A.No. 1 of 2(18 in W.P.N0.23479 of 2018. |.A.NO:1 OF 2019 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir:umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour rnay be pleased to extend the interim order dated 10-07-2018 in l.A.No.1 of 20.1 tl n W.P.No.23479 of 2018 and as extended on 01-O2-2O19 pending disposal of the v,rrit petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI NAUMENE SURAPARAJ )< ARLAPALEM RAPARAJ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI CH.VENKAT RAMAI{ The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO IVRIT PETITION No.23479 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ PeLition has bccn liled by the petitioner/ accused Nos. 1 to 3 for seeking quash in C.C.No.727 of 2018 on the file of learncd 23'd Metn;politan Magistratc, Rajcndranagar, Cyberabad registcrcd for thc olfcnces punishzrble under Section 82 of Juvenile .IusLrce (Care and Protc< tion of Chitdren) Act, 2015 (Hereafter relerrcd as rhc AcL).

2. Ileard Mr. Naumcnc Surapraj Karapalem raparaj, learned counsel Ibr the petitioner through video conference, Mr.Ch.Venkat Raman appeared on bchalf of rcspondent No.3 and learned AssistanL Gove rnment Pleadcr li)r I lurnc on be half oI re spondent No.1 and 2.

3. Learned counscl lor rhc petitioncrs submitted that the petitionors havc not commifted anv offence and they were falsely implicated even according ro rhe allegations made either in the complaint or in the cl-rargeshcet and ir does not aftract Section 82 of the Act. The only allegation madc against the petitioners is that lvhen the I-.W I came to the school u'ithoul \\rearing shoes and they havc pur-rished thc I-.W I bv keeping I'rim in thc library room. Though the petitioner's intcntion is rhat to maintain discipline and the dress code , they havc inlormcd the I-W 1 lo come to school in school I \ uniform ard l)y wearing shoes. Hence, thc oflcn.. LLntrr:r Section g2 of the act i:; not attracted. 1' He f-rrther submit[ed that the investigartio r ()['r'iccr, \\'ithoLlr properly c.nducting the investigation, ftled ir fir-,r. rt,p.rt arcl the learned M:Lgistrate also without verifying thc prr r r;iorrs of the Act Look cognizance. Hence, the continuation ol thc pr-: .:.<:rli.gs is clc:rrlv an erbusc of lrrocess of las,. In support ol lris cO : (.ltlr()n lre r_Cliccl upon the order dated 7.ro.2024 passed i. crr.MC N.. .r().48 of Jo,22 by the High Court of Kerala.

5. Per Oontra, learncd counsel appearilrg lirr. r.r,sponclcnt No.3 submitted lhat there are specific allegations :rre l. .., il<.rl tLgarnst lhc petitioners that they harassed the LW1 ment:rll-r. ar,.l l)lr\ src:rlh. .rn(i Lhe investigati;rg officer after recorciing the statern(,r ir .l rlrc *.iLne sscs lilecl a fina] report and the learned Magisrrarc h:1 . rrglrri.r. took rhc c.gnizance. Hc further submitted that whcthe r tl , rcIilirners hzrvc committed rhe offences or not and Lhc samc has .. I ,c r(.\.calecl altcr full fledged trial and the petitioners arc noL t: .titre(r r, st.k cl,ershing of the proce :dings.

6. Learn:d Assistant Government ple:rder hri. also reitcratccl same submissions madc by learncd counsel lilr llc.i: ldlnI No.3

7. Having considered thc rival submissions made by the respecti\rc parties and upon perutsal oI tl're material available on record, iL is revealed that u'hcn the L.Wl u,ho is the son of the rcspondent No.3 attended thc sc:hool n iLhout u'earing appropriate shocs, petitioner No.1 while discharging her duties as a school coordinator warned the LW1 to come to school n'earing appropriate shoes and come to school. Hcnce , the provisions of Section 82 of the Acl are not attracted I I B. In Crl.M.C. No. 2948 of 2022, the Kerala High Court, while adjudicating a similar case, u'ht're an 8th-standard studenl was askcd to change lrom colored clothcs into lhe school uniform, for u,hich the prosecution allegcd, the s[udcnt $'as mental harassed. The court held that insisting on a uniform for maintaining school discipline does not amount to crueltv or cause unnecessary mental or physical suflering to a child as cotrtemplated under Section 75. Thc Court further observed Lhat trcating such disciplinary actions as criminal offences would unclermine school discipline and found that no prima facie case was made out, thcr(]b].' quashing the linal report and all furthcr proccedings. 9- For the foregoing rcasons, this Court is of the considered view that the contrnuation ol the proceedings against the petitioners is clearly an abuse of proccss of'lari'- In the result, the writ petition is + ^--'1 allou,ed and the proceedings against the petirion,:r rr (.C.No./2/ ol 2018 on the lile of learned 23rrr Mctror,, rilrrr Nr:rqistraLc, Rajendranzrg:r r. Cr.'bcrabad are herebr,. quashe<i Misc,:lkrneous applications, pencling if anv :r :; lll s ler nd closc cl //TRUE COPYII f$s \ SD/-G. JYOTHI ANT REGISTRAR {rcrroN oFFrcER Hyderabarl. '1 . The Secretary, Department of Home Secretariat, Stdte rr'Telangana at 2. The Statior House Officer, [Vloinabad Police Station Cyt)r]rabad, Hyderabad 3. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State ( I Telangana at Hyderabacl. [OUT] , Advocate IOPUC]

4. ONC CC tO SRI NAUMENE SURAPARAJ KARLAPALEI,/ RAPARAJ 5 One CC to SRI CH VENKAT RAMAN, Advocate (OPU( )) 6. Two CD Ccpies o To SA GJ C.C. TODAY (. a-t iS ti ls C: -:_:_ \ f HIGH COURT DATED:0811012025 ORDER WP.No.23479 of 2018 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. a h r