IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6397 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
RAJEEV G.E.
SON OF ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS WORKING AS BEO, HONNALI TALUK OFFICE OF BEO, HONNALI DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 002.
RESIDING AT MIG 12, KHB COLONY 1ST STAGE, VINOBANAGARA SHIVAMOGGA – 577 225.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI M.R.HIREMATHAD, ADV.,) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NYAMATHI POLICE STATION NYMATHI, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577002 REP.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE – 560 001 2. BASAVARAJ M. SON OF KOTRAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD MASTER SHASAKAAR SARKARI MADARI HIRIYA PRATHAMIKA SHALE (GOVERNMENT MODEL HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL OF MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY) NYAMATHI, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577002 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI R.D.RENUKARADHYA, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO (a) QUASH THE ADDITIONAL CHARGE SHEET NO.26/2019 DATED 15.07.2019 IN CRIME NO.175/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT DAVANAGERE IN S.C.NO.109/2019 (b) CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.109/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT DAVANAGERE IN S.C.NO.109/2019 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND FOR PASSING OF SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR ORDERS.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner has questioned the validity of additional charge sheet No.26/2019 dated 15.07.2019 in Cr.No.175/2018 on the file of 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge at Davanagere in S.C.No.109/2019, 2. Brief facts of the case are that aggrieved parents of children studying in Government School, Nyamathi registered a complaint relating to sexual harassment to the children of aforesaid school. On receipt of such complaint, the petitioner should have registered the complaint before jurisdictional police station in terms of provisions of POCSO Act 2012. Due to inaction on the part of petitioner, police have registered a case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that aggrieved parents of the children of the said school have requested the petitioner to protect their children. It was also submitted that necessary action has been taken against the concerned teacher. As there was summer vacation to the school, he could not collect the material and hence, he could not registered the complaint before the jurisdictional court under the provisions of Section 19 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and hence, there is no infirmity.
These are the aspects which are to be examined in full fledged trial before the jurisdictional court. Hence, no interference is called for in the present petition.
Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
In view of dismissal of main petition, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration. Hence, same stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE HJ