Karnataka High Court
Baby Poojary vs State Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2026
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO.36321 OF 2018 (GM-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO.46181 OF 2017 (GM-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO.15766 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
IN W.P. NO.36321/2018
BETWEEN:
1. BABY POOJARY
W/O. LOKESH POOJARY
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
R/AT KATEELU DEVARA GUDDE MANE
BADAG YEKKAR, KATEEL
MANGALORE TALUK
2. LOKESH POOJARY
Digitally signed
by SUMA B N S/O. LATE ANAND POOJARY
Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
COURT OF R/AT KATEELU DEVARA GUDDE MANE
KARNATAKA
BADAG YEKKAR, KATEEL
MANGALORE TALUK
3. ANASUYA MANJUNATH
W/O. MANJUNATH D. N.
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT DOGGANAALA VILLAGE
HOLALKERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
4. MANJUNATH D. N.
S/O. NANJUNDAPPA N.
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT DOGGANAALA VILLAGE
HOLALKERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RISHAB D. DESAI AND MS. SOUMYA R. NAIR,
ADVOCATES FOR SRI PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF HOME
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
2. DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
3. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH ITS MINISTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE
REFORMS AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES
5TH FLOOR SARDAR PATEL BHAWAN
SANSAD MARG
NEW DELHI-110 001
4. DR. MOHAN ALVA
CHAIRMAN/TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION
FOUNDATION MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
5. M. ANANDA ALVA
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
6. AMARANATHA SHETTY
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
7. RAVINDRA SHETTY
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
8. M. VIVEK ALVA
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
9. M. VINAY ALVA
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
10. SMT. JAYASHREE AMARANATH SHETTY
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W
SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA AND
SRI. R.A. MACHAKANUR, AGA. FOR R-1 AND R-2
SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3
SRI P. P. HEGDE, SR. COUNSEL A/W
SMT. SAMEEKSHA T. R., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI PRAJWAL B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-4, R-5 & R-7
TO R-10
V/O DATED 02/08/2023 R-6 IS DELETED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION TO
INVESTIGATE THE DEATH OF MS. KAVYA POOJARY AND MS.
RACHANA MANJUNATH, AS WELL AS OTHER SUSPICIOUS
DEATHS WHICH HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE SCHOOLS AND
COLLEGES RUN BY ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
THROUGH THE RESPONDENTS NO.4-10 AND TO SUBMIT A
REPORT WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON'BLE
COURT AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO COMPLY WITH THE
DIRECTIONS/IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
ORDER OF THE KARNATAKA STATE CHILD RIGHTS
PROTECTION COMMISSION DATED 05.09.2017 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-W.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN W.P.NO.46181/2017
BETWEEN:
1. DR. M. MOHAN ALVA
S/O. MIJAR GUTTU ANANDA ALVA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
CHAIRMAN
ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODABIDRI, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT
KARNATAKA-574 227
2. VIVEK ALVA
S/O. DR.M.MOHAN ALVA
MANAGING TRUSTEE
ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODABIDRI, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT
KARNATAKA-574 227
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI UDAY HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI JEEVAN GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSION
FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS
O/A, 4TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
RANI CHENNAMMA CIRCLE
BENGALURU-560 002
REPRESENTED BY CHAIRPERSON
2. THE COMMITTEE
(APPOINTED BY KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSION
FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS)
O/A. 4TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN
NRUPATUNGA ROAD
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
RANI CHENNAMMA CIRCLE
BENGALURU-560 002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RISHAB D. DESAI AND
MS. SOUMYA R. NAIR, ADVOCATES FOR
SRI. PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND R-4
V/O DATED 12/12/2024, SMT. M. POORNIMA,
ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 18.08.2017 SUBMITTED BY R-2
BEFORE R-1 WITH RESPECT TO DEATH OF MS.KAVYA ALONG
WITH SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING
RECOMMENDATION FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION BY
PETITIONERS TO THE DECEASED FAMILY TOWARDS
COMPENSATION OF HER UN-NATURAL DEATH AS HIGHLY
ARBITRARY ILLEGAL AND IN GROSS VIOLATION OF ARTICLE
14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA VIDE ANNEX-
A AND ETC.
IN W.P.NO.15766/2019
BETWEEN:
1. RAMACHANDRA REDDY
S/O. LATE MUNIVENKATA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
2. K. R. SHOBHA
W/O. RAMACHANDRA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT CHANDAPURA
ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU-560 099.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RISHAB D. DESAI AND MS. SOUMYA R. NAIR,
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
ADVOCATES FOR SRI PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH ITS MINISTRY OF HOME
VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
2. DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
3. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH ITS MINISTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS
& PUBLIC GRIEVANCES 5TH FLOOR SARDAR PATEL
BHAWAN, SANSAD MARG
NEW DELHI-110 001
4. DR. MOHAN ALVA
CHAIRMAN/TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
5. M. ANANDA ALVA TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION
FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 227
6. AMARNATH SHETTY TRUSTEE
ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT-574 227
7. RAVINDRA SHETTY
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT-574 227
8. M. VIVEK ALVA
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT-574 227
9. M. VINAY ALVA
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT-574 227
10. SMT. JAYASHREE AMARNATHA SHETTY
TRUSTEE-ALVA'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
MOODUBIDIRE
FATHER'S NAME UNKNOWN
AGED MAJOR
VIDYAGIRI, MOODUBIDIRE
DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT-574 227
...RESPONDENTS
-9-
NC: 2026:KHC:20427
WP No. 36321 of 2018
C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017
WP No. 15766 of 2019
HC-KAR
(BY SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W
SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA AGA AND
SRI R. A. MACHAKANUR, A.G.A. FOR R-1 AND R-2
SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3
SRI P. P. HEGDE, SENIOR. COUNSEL A/W
SMT. SAMEEKSHA T. R., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI PRAJWAL B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 TO R-10)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION TO INVESTIGATE
THE DEATH OF MS.VINUTHA R. WHICH HAS TAKEN PLACE IN
THE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES RUN BY ALVA'S EDUCATION
FOUNDATION THROUGH THE R-4-10 AND TO SUBMIT A
REPORT WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON-
BLE COURT.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
W.P.No.36321/2018 is filed by parents of One Ms.Kavya Poojary, as well as parents of one Ms.Rachana Manjunath, seeking following reliefs:
''A. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate the death of Ms. Kavya Poojary and Ms. Rachana Manjunath, as well as other suspicious deaths which have taken place in the schools and colleges run by Alva's Education Foundation through the Respondents No. 4-10 and to submit a report within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court:
B. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to comply with the directions / implement the recommendations of the order of the
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Karnataka State Child Rights Protection Commission dated 05.09.2017 produced at Annexure W;
C. Issue or grant such other relief as may be deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.''
2. W.P.No.15766/2019 is filed by parents of one Ms. Vinutha. R, seeking following reliefs:
'' A. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate the death of Ms. Vinutha R which has taken place in the schools and colleges run by Alva's Education Foundation through the Respondents No. 4-10 and to submit a report within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;
B. Issue or grant such other relief as may be deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.''
3. W.P.No.46181/2017, is filed by the Chairman and Managing Trustee of Alva Education Foundation, Moodbidre, seeking following reliefs:
'' i. Issue writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing enquiry report dated 18.08.2017 submitted by Respondent No.2 before Respondent No.1 with respect to death of Ms. Kavya along with several recommendations including recommendation for payment of compensation by Petitioners to the deceased family towards compensation of her un-natural death as highly arbitrary illegal and in gross violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Annexure A ii. Issue writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing communication dated 6.09.2017 bearing No.KARAMAHARAA/559/07/2017 issued by Respondent No.1 along with order dated 5.09.2017 bearing No. KSCRPC: 559:07:2017 passed by Respondent No.1 is highly arbitrary illegal and abuse of process of law. Annexure B & B1 iii. Issue writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of Respondents in initiating Suo Moto enquiry on 31.07.2017 under Section 14(1)(a) of Child Protection Act 2005 and thereby submitting enquiry report dated 18.08.2017 and consequently taking unanimous decision dated 22.08.2017 for implementation of report and consequently passing impugned order
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR dated 5.09.2017 under impugned communication dated 6.09.2017 directing the Petitioners to submit the compliance report is not only highly arbitrary illegal and gross violation of principals of natural justice but also without authority of law. (Annexure A, B & B1).
iv. Grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.''
4. These three petitions revolve around unfortunate, untimely and unnatural deaths of aforesaid Ms. Kavya Poojary aged 14 years (died on 20.07.2017), Ms. Rachana Manjunath aged 17 years (died on 25.01.2018) and Ms. Vinutha. R aged 17 years (died on 12.09.2018).
5. According to the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.36321-24/2018, their daughter Ms. Kavya Poojary, was studying in Class IX at Sri. Durgaparameshwari High School, Kateel. She was introduced to one Mr. Praveen by Mr. Santosh, a Physical Trainer at said Sri. Durgaparameshwari High School, Kateel. Mr. Praveen represented himself to be a Sports Coach at Alva's group of Institutions and suggested Ms. Kavya Poojary would get admission in the said institution under Sports Quota and would receive advanced training in ball badminton. That on 18.06.2017, Ms. Kavya Poojary was selected for admission to Alva's Education Foundation Kannada Medium High School under sports quota. On 17.07.2017 and
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 19.07.2017 internal assessment test was conducted and Ms. Kavya Poojary is stated to have secured marks as under:
'' (i) 14.5. Over 20 in Social Science;
(ii) 7 over 20 in Mathematics;
(iii) 17.5 over 20 in Kannada;
(iv) 11 over 20 in English;
(v) 11.5 over 20 in General Science;
(vi) 7 over 20 in Hindi.'' 5.1. That on 19.07.2017, Ms. Kavya Poojary had informed her parents that Mr. Praveen had called her for ball badminton practice at 04.00 a.m., of the next morning and she had asked her parents to visit her on Saturday with her favorite snacks.
Parents were apprehensive about the odd hours of practice session. That on 20.07.2017 at about 8.00 p.m., petitioner No.2 had received a call from Mr. Praveen informing that Ms. Kavya Poojary had committed suicide. He had apparently informed that he was in Puttur at that time and was yet to see the body.
5.2 It is further alleged that from the status report submitted by the Police, one Mr. Kalmesh, driver of Maruthi Omni of Alva's College, had received death information of Ms.
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Kavya Poojary from Alva's Hospital and had delivered it to the Station House Officer, Moodbidre Police Station at 08.30 p.m. on 20.07.2017. That on receipt of such information, Police had claimed to have made their way to said hospital at about 08.45 p.m. It is alleged that at 08.30 p.m. on 20.07.2017, said Mr. Praveen was already at the Alva's hospital, despite he previously informing the parents of Ms. Kavya Poojary of he being at Puttur. When the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 reached the hospital, there was nobody from the Alva's School who either met or spoke to them. Petitioner No.1 was required to sign a fresh page of a new Register. That Ms. Kavya Poojary's body had already been shifted to morgue and was already cold and rigid.
5.3. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 did not see any ligature mark on the neck of deceased Ms. Kavya Poojary. At 09.30 p.m. of 20.07.2017 petitioners were informed that Ms. Kavya's body would not be handed over to them until they recorded their statements. Accordingly, petitioner No.2 with the assistance of one Mr. Arun gave his statement pointing out the suspicious circumstances surrounding Ms. Kavya Poojary's deaths and sought thorough investigation.
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 5.4 However, Mr. Dejappa, Police Sub Inspector, rewrote the entire statement indicating Ms. Kavya Poojary had committed suicide on account of she having secured poor marks in Hindi exam. Despite repeated requests by the petitioner Nos.1 and 2, they were not even furnished with the UDR report. Petitioner No.2 had requested that he would go to the room in the hostel where Ms. Kavya Poojary had purportedly hung herself. However, he was made to stand outside the room for over half an hour, while the said PSI and other staff had gone inside the room.
5.5 That on 21.07.2017, post mortem of Ms. Kavya Poojary was conducted at Community Health Center, Moodbidre. During that time police officers kept moving in and out of the room. After the post mortem, Ms. Kavya's personal belongings were returned to the petitioner No.2 except for her journal.
5.6 That none of the Authorities from Alva's group spoke to the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and none of them attended Kavya's funeral either. PSI had taken the statements of witnesses namely Mr. Muthappa Poojary, Kum. Nikita Shetty,
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Kum. Sangeetha, Kum. Vijayalakshmi Kollur, Kum. Sambeen Shaikh, Kum. Amrutha D and Kum. Vijayalakshmi Garaga at the time of inquest. Statement of witnesses namely Praveen Kumar Gadigeppa Gowda Patil, ambulance driver at Alva's Hospital, Moodbidri; Kum. Bandhana, student and Smt. Girija, Warden were also taken by the PSI.
5.7 That on 23.07.2017, petitioners received a call from one Sri. Ashok, a cameraman by profession, who informed them that he would arrange for a meeting with respondent No.4 in order to settle the matter.
5.8 On 24.07.2017, apprehensive of the flawed investigation, petitioner No.2 wrote to the Police inspector seeking a thorough investigation and highlighting several concerns with the current investigation.
5.9 That on 25.07.2017 and 28.07.2017, Mr. Praveen Kumar's statements were recorded for the first time in the context of Ms. Kavya Poojary's death. However, not in the direction of any suspicious circumstances of his involvement in the matter. PSI also had taken the statement of one Mr.Pramod Kumar, Physical Education teacher, who had provided
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR weightlifting training to the students at Alva's institution in his free time, Smt. Vanishri, Student Welfare Officer and Cultural Coordinator for PUC and Degree College at Alva's College. Mr. Santhosh Kumar, Kavya's sports teacher from Durgaparameshwari High School, Kateel, Kum. Divya, Second year B.Com student at Alva's College and Smt. Hamsavathi, Physical Director and Kabaddi Coach at Alva's B.Ed. College.
5.10 That on 28.07.2017, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mangalore North Sub-Division, claimed to have commenced further investigation into Ms. Kavya's death based on the order from the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Mangalore City,Mangalore.
5.11 That on 29.07.2017, said ACP further questioned Kum. Vijayalakshmi Kollur, Kum. Sambeen Shaikh, Kum. Yasmeen Shaikh, Kum. Amrutha D. S., Kum. Vijayalakshmi Garaga, who were the roommates of Ms. Kavya Poojary, who had reiterated their earlier statements. Kum. Nikhita Shetty, BHRD student and Kum. Sangeetha, Warden were once again question by said ACP.
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 5.12 That on 30.07.2017, ACP recorded statements of petitioner Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Muthappa Poojary(Ms. Kavya's grandfather), Mr. Karan Raj, neighbour of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and Ms.Lalitha Kollur, mother of Kum. Vijayalakshmi Kollur and roommate of Ms. Kavya.
5.13 That on 31.07.2017, the Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights had ordered an investigation into the death of Ms. Kavya, setting up three members committee comprising of Sri. Anand Lobo, Dr. Vanitha Thoravi and Smt. Roopa Nayak to investigate into the matter.
5.14 That the ACP had further recorded the statements of Mr. Girish Gowda, class teacher of Kavya, Kum. Pramila Jain, Mathematics teacher of Kavya and Kum. Divya, Kum.Sushmitha M, Kum. Mahalakshmi, Kum. Meghana, Kum.Lavanya, Kum. Pallavi, students and all badminton players. Police Inspector Ramachandra Naik, Vijay Kanchan, Head Constable, Sujan Police Constable and Akheel Ahmad Police Constable.
5.15 That on 01.08.2017, statements were recorded from Dr. Kurien, Principal of Alva's College, Mr. Naveen Raj, Director
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR of Physical Education at PU College and Dr. Mohan Alva, Chairman at Alva's Foundation.
5.16 On 02.08.2017, statements of Kum. Manasa, Kum.Yamini, Kum. Krithika, Kum. Ananya, ball badminton players at Durgaparameshwari High School, Kateel were also recorded. Further statements of Mr. Shantaram, (Physical education teacher at Swami Vivekananda Pre-University College, Edapadavu), Mr. Ganesh S Poojary, construction site supervisor at Alva's, Mr. Ullas N.V., Alumnus of Alva's College, Mr. Tilak Shetty, Director of physical education of Alva's, Dr.Rajat Rajkumar, Doctor at Alva's Hospital, Dr. Nikhil Kumar, Doctor at Alva's Hospital, Mr. Krishna, Physical Education Teacher at said Durgaparameswari School, Kateel and Mr. Nidhish Tolar were also recorded.
5.17 That on 03.08.2017, petitioner No.1 had written a letter to the ACP highlighting numerous instances, where due process of law not being followed in the investigation. That on 04.08.2017, petitioner No.1 and Mr. Arun, Ms. Kavya's maternal uncle were questioned and the statements were taken. Further, the statements of Smt. Reena, Nurse and Kum.
- 19 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Shantha, Nurse and further Sri. Sundar, Ward staff were also recorded by the ACP.
5.18 That on 06.08.2017, statement of one Mrs. Roshani Prashanth, a colleague of Mr. Praveen from Haleyangadi was recorded by the ACP. On 07.08.2017, statement of Mr. Ramesh Shetty, Principal of Alva's P.U. College was also recorded. On 08.08.2017, statement of Mr. Praneeth Kumar, Student Welfare Officer, Mr. Anand T.N, Physical Education teacher at Alva's Kannada Medium High School and Mr. Gopala M, Senior Supervisor at Alva's Education Foundation were recorded.
5.19 On 16.08.2017, statement of Smt. Shwetha, Warden, Kum. Sandhya, Kum. Prashanthi Shetty, both Students Welfare Officers, Mr. Pradeep, Campus Supervisor, Mr. Sandeep Nayak and Mr. Hari Prasad, Student Welfare Officers, Avinash, Security Supervisor and Premnath Shetty, Housekeeping staff were recorded. That on 18.08.2017, the Child Welfare Committee had submitted the report noting failure of children's rescue operation at the Alva's Group and its suspicions on the role of Mr. Praveen, recommending high level investigation into this role with the death of Ms. Kavya.
- 20 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 5.20 That on 06.09.2017, the Commission had issued a letter to respondent No.4, representative of Alva's Group directing compliance with the Committee's recommendations through its order to said Alva's group of Institution regarding safety of children.
5.21 Further, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 not being satisfied with the course of investigation adopted by the PSI and thereafter Assistant Commissioner of Police are before this court seeking reliefs as noted above.
5.22 During the pendency of the petition, a status report dated 05.10.2018 was prepared by the ACP, opining that said Ms. Kavya Poojary not being able to adjust to the strict routine of the students at Alva's School and being depressed of poor academic performance, had committed suicide.
5.23 That on 05.11.2018, a final report was submitted by ACP in furtherance to the earlier status report, claiming Ms. Kavya Poojary had died of suicide beyond any doubt.
6. According to petitioner Nos.3 and 4 in W.P.No.36321- 24/2018, their daughter Ms. Rachana Manjunath, had joined
- 21 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Alva's PUC College and was residing at Sharavathi Ladies Hostel.
6.1 That on 25.01.2018 at about 08.22 a.m. said Ms. Rachana Manjunath, who was in her II PUC, allegedly fell to her death from the 3rd Floor of her classroom. This incident had occurred when the school was on holiday.
6.2 That on 25.01.2018 at 09.00 a.m., petitioner No.4 received a call informing about Ms. Rachana falling from the third floor and being under serious conditions. At 10 a.m., petitioner No.4 was informed about Ms. Rachana being shifted from Alva's Hospital to A.J. Shetty Hospital and she being admitted in ICU. Petitioner No.4 was informed about Ms. Rachana falling from 4th floor of her classroom between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m., when petitioner No.4 reached the hospital, he was made to sign a fresh page of a new register informing that Ms. Rachana had fallen from the 5th floor. That at 11.30 a.m. police had informed Ms. Rachana having fallen from the building. At 11.55 a.m. petitioner No.4 was informed Rachana had passed away and that petitioner No.4 was also informed
- 22 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR that said Ms. Rachana had allegedly written a death note in Kannada in one of her last page of her notebook.
6.3 When petitioner Nos.3 and 4 checked the notebook, they realized handwriting in the death note did not match with the handwriting of their daughter.
6.4 Being suspicious of the circumstances of the death, petitioner No.4 filed a complaint based on which, FIR was registered in Crime No.21/2018. On 26.01.2018 at about 01.00 a.m., petitioner Nos.3 and No.4 were allowed to see the body of the deceased Ms. Rachana Manjunath. She was wrapped in a bed sheet and they were not allowed to see the clothes of Ms. Rachana Manjunath wearing at the time of her death.
6.5 Petitioner Nos.3 and 4 noticed that there were red wound mark on the right leg and bruise marks around her neck. There are no other visible wounds on the body. Between 09.40 p.m. and 12.00 p.m. of 26.01.2018, ACP had conducted spot Mahazar in the presence of Smt. Ranjani Shetty, Smt. Shalini, Sri. Rajesh and Sri. Dharmendra Ballal.
- 23 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 6.6 That on 19.09.2018, one Mr. Keerthi, a Site Engineer had been arrested and was released on bail.
7. As regards, the death of Ms. Vinutha, daughter of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.15766/2019, it is contended that she was a bright student and had scored well in her SSLC examination, securing 96.80%. She was admitted to Alva's Pre- University College for better education. She continued to perform well scoring 95.17% in her I PUC examination. She was promoted to II PUC for academic year 2018-2019.
7.1 Petitioners had met their daughter Ms. Vinutha during August 2018 when they had come to pay her college fees and had attended parent teacher's meeting and were pleased to see her doing well academically and had found her behavior to be normal.
7.2 That on 12.09.2018, petitioner No.1 got a call around 08.15 a.m. from Dr. Kurien, from the administrative office of Alva's Pre-University College, informing Ms. Vinutha having committed suicide, by locking herself inside a room at Hemavathi Ladies Hostel at Alva's Campus. Petitioners along with some of their relatives rushed to the hospital immediately,
- 24 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR where they were shown the dead body of Ms. Vinutha. Police had intimated the petitioners about the death, who had registered a case in UDR No.45/2018 stating that Ms. Vinutha was upset and disappointed since morning as her name had not appeared in the top 300 names of the list of NEET toppers.
7.3 The report also stated that she was stressed as she was not prepared for the biology exam. As such, she had committed suicide. That on 12.09.2018, petitioner No.1 was forced to write a letter to Police officer/Sub-Inspector of Police, Moodbidre dictated by the police themselves requesting for the release of body of his daughter who allegedly committed suicide by tying her neck with a scarf to the grill of the window in a room between 06.30 a.m. and 06.50 a.m. As she had not prepared for the Biology Lab exam scheduled on 12.09.2018, and she was fed up of her life.
7.4 That on 13.09.2018, after completion of the post mortem procedure, petitioners had taken possession of the dead body of Ms. Vinutha and other personal belongings from the Wenlock District Hospital, Mangalore.
- 25 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 7.5 That on 23.10.2018, her death certificate was issued. During September and December 2018, petitioners were shocked to learn about the series of such similar deaths of the students that had taken place in the various Institutions of Alva's Education Foundation for the last few years, indicating absolute failure of State machinery in investigation of multiple deaths.
7.6 That since no significant amount of investigation had taken place, despite significant amount of time having been passed, there was no progress in the investigation constraining the petitioners to approach this Court seeking the reliefs as noted hereinabove.
8. Writ petition in W.P.No.46181/2017 is by the representatives of Alva's Group of Institutions being aggrieved by the enquiry report as per order dated 18.08.2017 along with order dated 05.09.2017 and communication dated 06.09.2017 issued by respondent No.1 in terms of which the respondent No.1 has passed an order directing the Alva's Group to pay compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- to Ms. Kavya Poojary's family.
- 26 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
9. Sri. Rishab D Desai, learned counsel along with Ms. Soumya Nair, learned counsel appearing for Sri. Pradeep Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioners taking this Court extensively through the records submits;
(a) that apart from these three deaths in the institutions run by Alva's Foundation, there are about 11 deaths between the year 2011 and 2016.
(b) That the circumstances surrounding the deaths of these students in the very same institution run by the very same group raises a serious concern, which requires an enquiry by the independent investigation agency.
(c) He refers to the final report submitted by the Police in these matters to contend that the reasons and conclusions arrived at by the Investigation Officers and the narratives provided thereunder do not evince credibility.
(d) That in the case of Ms. Kavya Poojary, a flimsy reason of she scoring lesser marks in Hindi subject cannot be countenanced.
- 27 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
(e) That father of Ms. Kavya Poojary was forced to give a statement of she having failed in Hindi subject to be the reason for her suicide, when in-fact he himself was not aware of the result of the said subject till he was informed about her death.
(f) That Mr. Praveen Kumar, who was instrumental in Ms. Kavya Poojary's admission to the Alva's group of Institutions and his role has been distanced by the institution and no investigation is carried out in this direction. Though his statement was recorded, suspicious circumstances of he informing the parents of Ms. Kavya Poojary that he is in Puttur at that time and he being present at the hospital even before parents could reach the said hospital, he not being a regular employee of the said institution has not been looked into by the Investigation officers.
(g) That the place at which Ms. Kavya Poojary was found hanging, was accessible to others, which has also not been looked into by the Investigation officers.
(h) That merely on the basis of phone call which had ensued between Ms. Kavya Poojary and her mother has been analyzed by Dr. Uday Kumar, Psychiatrist/FSL Officer, who had
- 28 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR never ever met said Ms. Kavya Poojary during her lifetime and he has given a report of Ms. Kavya Poojary being a person having suicidal tendency, post the death of said Ms. Kavya Poojary. Such a report would not become a basis for the investigation officers to come into the conclusion of said Ms. Kavya Poojary committing suicide.
(i) That the CCTV footage of Ms. Kavya Poojary does not form part of the final report giving rise to further questions about the manner of investigation.
10. As regards, the case of Ms. Rachana Manjunath, he submits;
(a) That there are three different versions of the place from where she had fallen. There is inconsistency in the statements given by the witnesses who had informed the parents of Ms. Rachana Manjunath about her fall, i.e., 3rd floor, 4th floor and 5th floor.
(b) Further, absence of injuries which could have been sustained from the fall of this nature on the dead body of the
- 29 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR deceased Ms. Rachana Manjunath gives raise to serious doubt with regard to case of the police.
(c) That there are inconsistencies in the statements given by the witnesses giving raise to very suspicion of her death.
(d) He also refers to the purported death note of Ms. Rachana Manjunath and submits that there is dissimilarity in the admitted handwriting and the alleged death note. That merely based on the psychological report of Dr. Uday Kumar, Psychiatrist/FSL Officer of said Ms. Rachana Manjunath having suicidal tendency also gives rise to serious doubt. That the manner of investigation and the opinion given by the Psychiatrist/FSL Officer would indicate that an attempt has been made to cover and shield someone which could be the cause of the death of these two students. Therefore, he insists these matters requires investigation by an Independent Agency.
11. As regards, the death of Ms. Vinutha, he submits that it was impossible for her to have committed suicide by hanging from a window with a height of 4 feet, when she herself was 4.7 feet tall. He submits that, it was improbable for her to
- 30 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR hung herself from such a low window, which itself should have raised the flag for the Investigation agency.
12. Thus he submits that the repeated incidents of unnatural death of the students between the years 2008 and 2016 in the very same institution is sufficient enough that the cases fall within the "rarest of rare cases" requiring investigation by the Independent Agency.
13. He relies upon the following judgments;
1. State of West Bengal Vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights reported in (2010) 3 SCC 571;
2. Deep Chand Sood and others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others reported in 1997 ACJ 831;
3. Kishwar Jahan and another Vs. State of West Bengal and others reported in (2008) 3 CHN 857;
4. Gudalure M.J. Cherian and others v. Unafitya and others reported in (1992) 1 SCC 397;
5.Sreenivas Rajan Vs. The Director of Matriculation School and others reported in 2011 (2) CTC 776;
6. Mithilesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (2015) 9 SCC 795.
- 31 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Relying upon the aforesaid judgments, he insists that petitions be allowed directing respondent No.3-CBI to conduct independent enquiry and investigate the matters.
14. Sri. Uday Holla, learned Senior Counsel and Sri. P.P. Hegde, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents- Institution opposing the petitions submit;
(a) That the Alva's group of institution is currently having close to 30,000 students in Dakshina Kannada region spread across different districts catering to different levels of academic, non-academic courses. Merely because 11 incidents have taken place according to the petitioners, cannot be a ground to treat this as an exceptional cases warranting investigation by the agency like CBI.
(b) That a recent trend of suicide across India at different educational institutions indicate alarming trend requiring to be addressed by all stakeholders. He submits that though the instances of death of the daughters of the petitioners are unfortunate, investigation conducted by none other than the officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, who
- 32 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR have come to the conclusion of the same being suicidal, without there being any role of the respondent-Educational institution.
(c) Learned Senior counsel emphasizes that the present petitions appear to have been filed at the instance of some persons with vested interests, not being able to accept the growth of Alva's Group of Education over a short period of time.
(d) That already attempts have been made to tarnish the image and reputation of the said institution under the garb of espousing the cause of the petitioners in these petitions.
(e) That the petitioners have effective alternative remedy, if they are not satisfied with the course of investigation and the outcome and conclusion which has already been reached in the instant cases and since the petitioners have not made out any extraordinary circumstances of the cases falling under the "rarest of rare category" invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction to independent agency as that of CBI is wholly uncalled for.
- 33 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
(f) That the witnesses have been extensively examined, who have consistently deposed that the death of these three students was suicidal and any foul-play from anyone, whomsoever have been completely ruled out.
(g) That an order for investigation by an independent agency cannot be made from mere asking and the cases at hand do not qualify consideration of such a request.
15. They relied upon the following judgments in support of their submissions;
1. K.V. Rajendran Vs. Superintendent of Police, CBID, South Zone, Chennai and others reported in (2013) 12 SCC 480;
2. Shree Shree Ram Janki Ji Asthan Tapovan Mandir and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others reported in (2019) 6 SCC 777;
3. Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409;
4. State of West Bengal Vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights reported in (2010) 3 SCC 571. ' Referring to aforesaid judgments, they contended that the petitioners have not made out a case for investigation by the independent agency and petitioners are always at liberty to seek for further investigation by the concerned Magistrate
- 34 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR before whom the final report have already been filed. Hence, seeks for rejection of the petitions.
16. In continuation of the aforesaid submissions, Sri. Uday Holla, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.46181/2017 further submits;
(a) That the respondent-Commission has no jurisdiction or authority under law to pass order directing the Alva's Group of Institution to pay the compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- as sought to be done.
(b) That the purport and object of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005,is only to see that the 'Child Rights' are protected and safeguarded and the Committee of this nature is required to ensure compliance with the rules and regulations, if any, in place.
(c) That the enquiry contemplated under Section 15 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 has to be meaningful. He refers to summons as per Annexures-J and J1, dated 28.08.2017 to contend that the said summons were issued as a formality and without even providing sufficient
- 35 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR opportunity to the respondent-Institution, a lengthy report has been submitted, which is unilateral based on the imaginary reasoning.
(d) He relies upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Zainabhiya Education Society Vs. The Chairman, Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, Bangalore and Another reported in ILR 2019 KAR 2817, wherein referring to paragraph Nos.8, 9 and 10, learned Senior counsel submits that the respondent-Commission has no power to direct the management to pay the compensation. At the most, they can only recommend to the Government and the concerned authority for grant of relief.
(e) Further, Sri. Uday Holla, learned Senior counsel and Sri. P.P. Hegde, learned Senior counsel in unison submit that if warranted, commission may hold an enquiry afresh, providing full opportunity to the respondent-Institution, but not in the media glare as done in the instant case.
17. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3-CBI opposing the petitions submits that the law laid down by the
- 36 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (Supra) at paragraph No.70 would apply to the case of this nature.
18. Opposing the said submissions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sukdeb Saha Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 1515 and referring to paragraph No.35 and the guidelines laid down thereunder, insists that even at the time when the incidents had taken place, there were no safety mechanism put in place at the respondent-Institution, which is why the respondent-Commission had directed payment of compensation and the same cannot be found fault with. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petitions.
19. Heard and perused the records.
20. Points that arise for consideration:
" 1. Whether the petitioners in W.P.No.36321/2018 and W.P.No.15766-767/2019 have made the case requiring investigation/enquiry into the deaths of Ms. Kavya Poojary, Ms. Rachana Manjunatha and Ms. Vinutha R. through independent investigation agency namely through CBI?
- 37 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
2. Whether the petitioners in W.P.No.46181/2017 have made out a case for quash of report and order dated 18.08.2017 and order dated 05.09.2017 passed by respondent No.1-Commission ?"
21. The line of precedents cited by both the sides with regard to the principles governing exercise of power by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to investigate a cognizable offence by an agency other than the State Authority are well settled. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (Supra) at paragraph Nos.68 to 70 has held as under:
''68. Thus, having examined the rival contentions in the context of the constitutional scheme, we conclude as follows:
(i) The fundamental rights, enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, are inherent and cannot be extinguished by any constitutional or statutory provision. Any law that abrogates or abridges such rights would be violative of the basic structure doctrine. The actual effect and impact of the law on the rights guaranteed under Part III has to be taken into account in determining whether or not it destroys the basic structure.
(ii) Article 21 of the Constitution in its broad perspective seeks to protect the persons of their lives and personal liberties except according to the procedure established by law. The said article in its broad application not only takes within its fold enforcement of the rights of an accused but also the rights of the victim. The State has a duty to enforce the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and impartial investigation against any person accused of commission of a cognizable offence, which may include its own officers. In certain situations even a witness to the crime may seek for and shall be granted protection by the State.
- 38 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
(iii) In view of the constitutional scheme and the jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Article 32 and on the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution the power of judicial review being an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution, no Act of Parliament can exclude or curtail the powers of the constitutional courts with regard to the enforcement of fundamental rights. As a matter of fact, such a power is essential to give practicable content to the objectives of the Constitution embodied in Part III and other parts of the Constitution. Moreover, in a federal constitution, the distribution of legislative powers between Parliament and the State Legislature involves limitation on legislative powers and, therefore, this requires an authority other than Parliament to ascertain whether such limitations are transgressed. Judicial review acts as the final arbiter not only to give effect to the distribution of legislative powers between Parliament and the State Legislatures, it is also necessary to show any transgression by each entity. Therefore, to borrow the words of Lord Steyn, judicial review is justified by combination of "the principles of separation of powers, rule of law, the principle of constitutionality and the reach of judicial review".
(iv) If the federal structure is violated by any legislative action, the Constitution takes care to protect the federal structure by ensuring that the Courts act as guardians and interpreters of the Constitution and provide remedy under Articles 32 and 226, whenever there is an attempted violation. In the circumstances, any direction by the Supreme Court or the High Court in exercise of power under Article 32 or 226 to uphold the Constitution and maintain the rule of law cannot be termed as violating the federal structure.
(v) Restriction on Parliament by the Constitution and restriction on the executive by Parliament under an enactment, do not amount to restriction on the power of the Judiciary under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution.
(vi) If in terms of Entry 2 of List II of the Seventh Schedule on the one hand and Entry 2-A and Entry 80 of List I on the other, an investigation by another agency is permissible subject to grant of consent by the State concerned, there is no reason as to why, in an exceptional situation, the Court would be precluded from exercising the same power which the Union could exercise in terms of the provisions of the statute. In our opinion, exercise of such power by the constitutional courts would not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. In fact, if in such a situation the Court fails to grant relief, it would be failing in its constitutional duty.
(vii) When the Special Police Act itself provides that subject to the consent by the State, CBI can take up investigation in
- 39 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR relation to the crime which was otherwise within the jurisdiction of the State police, the Court can also exercise its constitutional power of judicial review and direct CBI to take up the investigation within the jurisdiction of the State. The power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away, curtailed or diluted by Section 6 of the Special Police Act. Irrespective of there being any statutory provision acting as a restriction on the powers of the Courts, the restriction imposed by Section 6 of the Special Police Act on the powers of the Union, cannot be read as restriction on the powers of the constitutional courts. Therefore, exercise of power of judicial review by the High Court, in our opinion, would not amount to infringement of either the doctrine of separation of power or the federal structure.
69. In the final analysis, our answer to the question referred is that a direction by the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to CBI to investigate a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State without the consent of that State will neither impinge upon the federal structure of the Constitution nor violate the doctrine of separation of power and shall be valid in law. Being the protectors of civil liberties of the citizens, this Court and the High Courts have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to protect the fundamental rights, guaranteed by Part III in general and under Article 21 of the Constitution in particular, zealously and vigilantly.
70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said articles requires great caution in its exercise. Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.''
- 40 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
22. Suffice for the purpose of this case, the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment, which has been referred to and reiterated in all the subsequent judgments.
23. The common thread which runs through these precedents is that ''although no flexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such powers be exercised, but, time and again, it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because the party has levelled some allegation against the local police''.
24. Facts of these three cases read in the light of the aforesaid principles would indicate that in the case of death of Ms. Kavya Poojary, the suspicion expressed by the parents is about Police Sub-Inspector, insisting her father to give a statement of she dying of suicide because she had scored less marks in 'Hindi subject'' and non-investigation of alleged role of one Mr. Praveen in the matter.
25. As regards, the case of death of Ms. Rachana, the suspicion is with regard to different statements of the place from where she had jumped to her death i.e., 3rd floor, 4th floor and 5th floor.
- 41 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
26. And in the case of Ms. Vinutha's, the suspicious circumstance expressed is with regard to the height of the window being 4 feet, while her height was 4.7 feet being improbable to be the place to commit suicide.
27. In addition, the opinion/report of Mr. Uday Kumar, Psychiatrist/FSL Officer, who according to the petitioners had never seen the deceased during their lifetime, yet had given his categoric opinion about their psychological aspects.
28. Except the aforesaid instances, no apprehension with regard to manner of investigations are pointed out. The petitioners have not made out the grounds which would impact and have national and international ramification. The records reveal that the enquiry has been conducted by the Officer of the Rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police. Statement of several witnesses in each case as noted above have been recorded.
29. As held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments, a case falling under the "rarest of rare category"
having national and international ramifications will have to be prima facie made out to take away the investigation process
- 42 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR from the State Investigation Agencies, which in the considered view of this Court on perusal of the records and considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners lacks. That does not mean that the petitioners are left with no other alternate effective remedy.
30. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, provisions of Sections 156(3), 173(8) and 200 of Cr.P.C are vast enough to encompass all the apprehensions which the victims/complainants may have in the process of investigation. Magistrate is not bereft of the power, authority and jurisdiction to call for and direct for further investigation into the matter. Indeed, Magistrate is statutorily obligated before accepting the final report by the police to look into the allegations and the final conclusion around it and if he finds consciously the investigation has not gone in a right manner, he is empowered to call for further report or direct further investigation into the matter.
31. In the light of the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter and the statutory power vested with the Jurisdictional Magistrate, without expressing any view on the merits or
- 43 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR otherwise of the contentions urged by the petitioners as well as on behalf of the respondent-Institution, this Court deems it appropriate that liberty be reserved to the petitioners to file such application before the Jurisdictional Magistrate, placing all their apprehensions for consideration, who shall pass appropriate order, including but not limited for further investigation, if required, and if the ground in that regard are made out strictly in accordance with law.
32. With the above observation, petitions in W.P.No.36321/2018 and W.P.No.15766/2019 are disposed of.
33. As regards, writ petition in W.P.No.46181/2017 filed by the Chairman and Managing Trustee of Alva Education Foundation, questioning the authority and jurisdiction and the conclusions arrived at by the respondent-Commission, perusal of the records would indicate that the respondent-Commission swung into action suo-moto taking cognizance of the reports from the media. Except the notice dated 28.08.2017 produced at Annexures-J and J1, giving only five days time to the respondent-Institution, nothing is placed on record to satisfy the requirement of Section 15 of the Commissions for
- 44 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 which warrants Commission to hold an inquiry under Sections 13 and 14 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005.
34. Sections 13 and 14 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, reads as under:
'' 13. Functions of Commission.--(1) The Commission shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely:--
(a) examine and review the safeguards provided by or under any law for the time being in force for the protection of child rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation;
(b) present to the Central Government, annually and at such other intervals, as the Commission may deem fit, reports upon the working of those safeguards;
(c) inquire into violation of child rights and recommend initiation of proceedings in such cases;
(d) examine all factors that inhibit the enjoyment of rights of children affected by terrorism, communal violence, riots, natural disaster, domestic violence, HIV/AIDS, trafficking, maltreatment, torture and exploitation, pornography and prostitution and recommend appropriate remedial measures;
(e) look into the matters relating to children in need of special care and protection including children in distress, marginalized and disadvantaged children, children in conflict with law, juveniles, children without family and children of prisoners and recommend appropriate remedial measures;
(f) study treaties and other international instruments and undertake periodical review of existing policies, programmes and other activities on child rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation in the best interest of children;
- 45 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
(g) undertake and promote research in the field of child rights;
(h) spread child rights literacy among various sections of the society and promote awareness of the safeguards available for protection of these rights through publications, the media, seminars and other available means;
(i) inspect or cause to be inspected any juvenile custodial home, or any other place of residence or institution meant for children, under the control of the Central Government or any State Government or any other authority, including any institution run by a social organisation; where children are detained or lodged for the purpose of treatment, reformation or protection and take up with these authorities for remedial action, if found necessary;
(j) inquire into complaints and take suo moto notice of matters relating to,--
(i) deprivation and violation of child rights;
(ii) non-implementation of laws providing for protection and development of children;
(iii) non-compliance of policy decisions, guidelines or instructions aimed at mitigating hardships to and ensuring welfare of the children and to provide relief to such children, or take up the issues arising out of such matters with appropriate authorities; and
(k) such other functions as it may consider necessary for the promotion of child rights and any other matter incidental to the above functions.
(2) The Commission shall not inquire into any matter which is pending before a State Commission or any other Commission duly constituted under any law for the time being in force.
14. Powers relating to inquiries.-- (1) The Commission shall, while inquiring into any matter referred to in clause (j) of sub-section (1) of section 13 have all the powers of a civil court trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of
- 46 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR 1908) and, in particular, in respect of the following matters, namely:--
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;
(b) discovery and production of any document;
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office; and
(e) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents.
(2) The Commission shall have the power to forward any case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same and the Magistrate to whom any such case is forwarded shall proceed to hear the complaint against the accused as if the case has been forwarded to him under section 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).
35. Further, as rightly pointed by the learned Senior Counsel, Section 15(i) of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 enables the Commission to issue recommendations and also to take further action in the nature of filing petition before this Court to ensure compliance of the recommendation.
36. Respondent-Commission, itself has no jurisdiction to pass orders determining the amount of compensation to pay.
37. It is relevant to refer to the judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Zainabhiya
- 47 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR Education Society (supra), wherein at paragraph Nos.8 to 10 has held as under:
''8. Under Section 15 of the Act, the Commission has only power to recommend to the concerned Government or authority. The word "recommendation" is defined as under in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition:
"Recommendation. In feudal law, a method of converting allodial land into feudal property. The owner of the allod surrendered it to the king or a lord doing homage, and received it back as a benefice or feud, to hold to himself and such of his heirs as he had previously nominated to the superior.
The act of one person in giving to another a favorable account of the character, responsibility, or skill of a third.
According to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition, recommendation means the act of recommending or something that recommends or expresses commendation.''
9. A careful perusal of the above provisions would show that after completion of an enquiry, if the Commission finds that the enquiry discloses commission of violation of child rights, the Commission may recommend to the concerned Government or authority the initiation of proceedings for prosecution or such other action; and as an interim measure, it can recommend the Government or authority for grant of interim relief to the victim or the members of his family, as the Commission may consider necessary. But the Commission has no authority and jurisdiction to pass an order directing for payment of compensation.
10. In the case on hand, the Commission has initiated proceedings under Section 14(1)(a) of the Act and issued notice to the petitioner on 17.9.2014 calling upon the petitioner to appear on 30.9.2014 at 3.00 P.M. Pursuant to the notice, the Secretary of the petitioner-Institution has appeared. The Commission without conducting an enquiry as provided under Section 14 of the Act, has passed an order to pay a sum of ₹ 1,00,000/-as interim compensation towards medical treatment to the victim. This order is contrary to the provisions of Sections 14 and 15 of the Act. The Commission has no power to direct the management to pay compensation. After completion of enquiry, the Commission can only recommend the Government or concerned authority for grant of such interim relief. Hence, the impugned Order dated 30.9.2014 vide Annexure-B passed by respondent No.1, is unsustainable. ''
- 48 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR
38. As such, the report of the respondent-Commission cannot be sustained both for substantial procedural lapse of not adhering to the process of enquiry contemplated under the law and also on the ground of exceeding the jurisdiction by passing an order to pay the compensation as done in the instant case.
39. Having said that, respondent-Commission is at liberty to hold fresh enquiry in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sukdeb Saha (supra) and the guidelines issued thereunder, wherein at paragraph No.35, it is held as under:
'' 35. Keeping in view of the above, and in exercise of the powers conferred upon this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights, and treating this pronouncement as law declared by this Court under Article 141, we hereby issue the following guidelines, which shall remain in force and be binding until such time as appropriate legislation or regulatory frameworks are enacted by the competent authority. The Guidelines are prescribed as under:
I. All educational institutions shall adopt and implement a uniform mental health policy, drawing cues from the UMMEED Draft Guidelines, the MANODARPAN initiative, and the National Suicide Prevention Strategy. This policy shall be reviewed and updated annually and made publicly accessible on institutional websites and notice boards of the institutes.
II. All educational institutions with 100 or more enrolled students shall appoint/engage at least one qualified counsellor, psychologist, or social worker with demonstrable training in child and adolescent mental health. Institutions with fewer students shall establish
- 49 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR formal referral linkages with external mental health professionals.
III. All educational institutions shall ensure optimal student-to-
counsellor ratios. Dedicated mentors or counsellors shall be assigned to smaller batches of students, especially during examination periods and academic transitions, to provide consistent, informal, and confidential support.
IV. All educational institutions, more particularly the coaching institutes/centres, shall, as far as possible, refrain from engaging in batch segregation based on academic performance, public shaming, or assignment of academic targets disproportionate to students' capacities.
V. All educational institutions shall establish written protocols for immediate referral to mental health services, local hospitals, and suicide prevention helplines. Suicide helpline numbers, including Tele-MANAS and other national services, shall be prominently displayed in hostels, classrooms, common areas, and on websites in large and legible print.
VI. All teaching and non-teaching staff shall undergo mandatory training at least twice a year, conducted by certified mental health professionals, on psychological first-aid, identification of warning signs, response to self- harm, and referral mechanisms.
VII. All educational institutions shall ensure that all teaching, non-teaching, and administrative staff are adequately trained to engage with students from vulnerable and marginalised backgrounds in a sensitive, inclusive, and non-discriminatory manner. This shall include, but not be limited to, students belonging to Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), LGBTQ+ communities, students with disabilities, those in out-of- home care, and students affected by bereavement, trauma, or prior suicide attempts, or intersecting form of marginalisation.
VIII. All educational institutions shall establish robust, confidential, and accessible mechanisms for the reporting, redressal, and prevention of incidents involving sexual assault, harassment, ragging, and bullying on the basis of caste, class, gender, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or ethnicity. Every such institution shall constitute an internal committee or designated authority empowered to
- 50 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR take immediate action on complaints and provide psycho- social support to victims. Institutions shall also maintain zero tolerance for retaliatory actions against complainants or whistle-blowers. In all such cases, immediate referral to trained mental health professionals must be ensured, and the student's safety, physical and psychological, shall be prioritised. Failure to take timely or adequate action in such cases, especially where such neglect contributes to a student's self-harm or suicide, shall be treated as institutional culpability, making the administration liable to regulatory and legal consequences.
IX. All educational Institutions shall regularly organise sensitisation programmes (physical and/or online) for parents and guardians on student mental health. It shall be the duty of the institution to sensitise the parents and guardians to avoid placing undue academic pressure, to recognise signs of psychological distress, and to respond empathetically and supportively. Further, mental health literacy, emotional regulation, life skills education, and awareness of institutional support services shall be integrated into student orientation programmes and co- curricular activities.
X. All educational institutions shall maintain anonymised records and prepare an annual report indicating the number of wellness interventions, student referrals, training sessions, and mental health-related activities. This report shall be submitted to the relevant regulatory authority, which may be the State Education Department, University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), or as otherwise indicated.
XI. All educational institutions shall prioritise extracurricular activities, including sports, arts, and personality development initiatives. Examination patterns shall be periodically reviewed to reduce academic burden and to cultivate a broader sense of identity among students beyond test scores and ranks.
XII. All educational institutions, including coaching centres and training institutes, shall provide regular, structured career counselling services for students and their parents or guardians. These sessions shall be conducted by qualified counsellors and shall aim to reduce unrealistic academic pressure, promote awareness of diverse academic and professional pathways, and assist students in making informed and interest-based career decisions. Institutions
- 51 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR shall ensure that such counselling is inclusive, sensitive to socioeconomic and psychological contexts, and does not reinforce narrow definitions of merit or success.
XIII. All residential-based educational institutions, including hostel owners, wardens and caretakers, shall take proactive steps to ensure that campuses remain free from harassment, bullying, drugs, and other harmful substances, thereby ensuring a safe and healthy living and learning environment for all students.
XIV. All residential-based institutions shall install tamper-proof ceiling fans or equivalent safety devices, and shall restrict access to rooftops, balconies, and other high-risk areas, in order to deter impulsive acts of self-harm.
XV. All coaching hubs, including but not limited to Jaipur, Kota, Sikar, Chennai, Hyderabad, Delhi, Mumbai, and other cities where students migrate in large numbers for competitive examination preparation, shall implement heightened mental health protections and preventive measures. These regions, having witnessed disproportionately high incidents of student suicides, require special attention. The concerned authorities, namely, the Department of Education, District Administration, and management of educational institutions, shall ensure the provision of regular career counselling for students and parents, regulation of academic pressure through structured academic planning, availability of continuous psychological support, and the establishment of institutional mechanisms for monitoring and accountability to safeguard student mental well-being.''
40. Before parting, this Court deems it appropriate that the respondent-Commission shall also ensure that it takes proactive steps in ensuring those guidelines are made applicable and adherence is complied with across the State as the incident of suicidal tendency pertains to educational institutions cannot be ignored. If in the event of respondent- Commission proceeding to hold enquiry, it is made clear such
- 52 -
NC: 2026:KHC:20427 WP No. 36321 of 2018 C/W WP No. 46181 of 2017 WP No. 15766 of 2019 HC-KAR enquiry shall be conducted strictly in accordance with law providing full and complete opportunity to the parties concerned and maintaining the decorum. In other words, not to conduct such enquiry in the media glare.
41. With the above observation, petition in W.P.No.46181/2017 is disposed of.
42. This Court during the hearing had directed the respondent-State to submit the reports. Copies of the reports have been submitted and the same were furnished to the learned counsel for the parties as well. Since the reports have already been filed before the Magistrate, in the light of liberty reserved to the petitioners, the Magistrate shall take into consideration and pass appropriate orders as directed hereinabove.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1