Karnataka High Court
Sri Dr Chidanand K V vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2019
Author: John Michael Cunha
Bench: John Michael Cunha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7918 OF 2016
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4192 OF 2016
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6031 OF 2016
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7918 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. SRI DR CHIDANAND K V
S/O VENKARAMANAGOWDA,
MAJOR,
VICE PRESIDENT
ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION
KURUNJIBAGH, SULLIA
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 574327
2. SRI DR RENUKA PRASAD
S/O KURUNJI VENKATARAMANAGOWDA,
MAJOR, GENERAL SECRETARY,
ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION,
KURUNJIBAGH, SULLIA
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 574327
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI: K.R.KESHAVA MURHTY, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH MANDYA EAST POLICE STATION,
2
MANDYA DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT
BANGALORE 560001
2. SRI H L KESHAVAMURTHY
S/O LATE H M LINGE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT NO.13, HOUSING BOARD APARTMENTS,
OPP FIRE STATION, GUTTLU POST,
MANDYA TOWN 571403
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
R2-ABATED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 20.11.2017)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 11.05.2011 ANNEXURE-A
THE COMPLAINT DATED 04.05.2011 ANNEXURE-B, CHARGE
SHEET DATED 09.02.2016 ANNEXURE-C AND ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDNGS IN CR.NO.126/2011 REGISTERED BY THE
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANDYA EAST POLICE STATION,
MANDYA DISTRICT NOW C.C.NO.438/2016 PENDING BEFORE
THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MANDYA FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 197, 417, 34,
120B, 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4192 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
DR.KAVYASHREE G
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
W/O DR H C RAMESH
WORKING AS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
3
DEPARTMENT OF GYNECOLOGY
MANDYA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
R/A 1415, SANNIDHI, JAINS COLONY
ASHOK NAGAR
MANDYA
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: VIJAYA RAGHAVA SARATHY H M, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MANDYA EAST POLICE
MANDYA TOWN
MANDYA-571401
2. SRI H L KESHAVAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
S/O LATE H M LINGE GOWDA
R/A NO.13, HOUSING BOARD APARTMENT
NEAR GUTTALU
MANDYA TOWN
MANDYA-571403
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1
SRI: G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2-ABSENT)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS
INITIATED IN C.C.NO.438/2016 (ANNEXURE-A) IN SO FAR AS IT
PERTAINS TO PETITIONER IS CONCERNED WHICH IS PENDING
BEFORE THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND C.J.M.,
MANDYA.
4
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6031 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
SMT. DR SHEELA G NAYAK
W/O LATE DR K G NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
PRINCIPAL, K V G MEDICAL COLLEGE,
SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT
NAGARJUNA MANNER APARTMENT
V V MOHALLA,
K R S ROAD,
MYSORE-570002
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: K.R.KESHAVA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH MANDYA EAST POLICE STATION,
MANDYA DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT,
BANGALORE-560001
2. SRI H L KESHAVAMURTHY
S/O LATE H M LINGE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT NO.13, HOUSING BOARD APARTMENTS,
OPP FIRE STATION, GUTTLU POST,
MANDYA TOWN 571403 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
SRI: B.T. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
5
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 11.05.2011, THE
COMPLAINT DATED 4.05.2011, CHARGE SHEET DATED
9.02.2016 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN CR.
NO.126/2011 REGISTERED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MANDYA EAST POLICE STATION NOW C.C.NO.438/2016
PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. C.J. AND J.M.F.C., MANDYA, FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 197, 417, 34,
120B, 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC AGAINST PETR.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
These three petitions are filed by accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 seeking quashment of the charge sheet filed against them for the offences punishable under sections 197, 417, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC.
Respondent No.2/complainant is dead and his legal representatives are not brought on record.
Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned Addl. SPP for respondent No.1.
2. The case of the prosecution is that even though accused No.1 did not work in K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, 6 Kurunjibag, Sullia, Dakshina Kannada, in the Department of OBG, she obtained a false experience certificate from accused No.5 to the effect that she worked therein as Assistant Professor in the department of OBG from 09.08.2001 to 30.04.2003. According to the prosecution, during this period, accused No.1 was working in Ramakrishna Nursing Home, Mandya and hence, the documents obtained by accused No.1 with regard to her experience being fake and fabricated and these documents having been issued at the instance of accused Nos.2, 3 and 4, a charge sheet has been laid against accused Nos.1 to 6 for the above offences.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners in Crl.P.No.4192/2016 referring to the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.4884/2012 and connected matters decided on 19.02.2019 would submit that in identical circumstances, this Court has quashed the proceedings initiated against the Assistant Professors who were accused of furnishing false experience certificates on the ground that the complainant had no locus-standi to initiate criminal proceedings and the complaint 7 filed against the petitioners was within the domain of Karnataka Medical Council and service jurisprudence.
4. Further, learned counsel appearing for accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crl.P No.7918/2016 has emphatically submitted that insofar as accused Nos.3 and 4 are concerned, there are no allegations whatsoever in the entire charge sheet to show that accused Nos.3 and 4 were involved either in fabrication of the alleged experience certificate or that they have given promotion or appointment to accused No.1 and therefore, the prosecution of accused Nos.3 and 4 is wholly illegal and baseless. Further, he submitted that insofar as accused No.5(Crl.P.No.6031/2016) is concerned, accused No.5 joined the college as Principal of K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, Sullya, subsequent to the appointment of accused No.1 in K.V.G. Medical College, Sullya and under the said circumstances, implication of accused No.5 in the alleged charge sheet is also baseless and illegal and is liable to be quashed.
5. Per-contra, learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1-State has referred to the specific material 8 collected by the investigating agency and pointed out that K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, Sullya was established only from April 2002 whereas accused No.5 Principal of the said college issued experience certificate certifying to the effect that accused No.1 has worked in the said department from 09.08.2001 to 30.04.2003. Further, prosecution has also collected incriminating material to show that during the relevant period, accused No.1 was working in Ramakrishna Nursing Home, Mandya and not in KVG Medical College, Sullya and hence, there being prima-facie material to substantiate the ingredients of the offences punishable under sections 465, 468 IPC and other offences mentioned in the charge sheet, there is no ground to quash the proceedings. He submitted that the contentions urged by the petitioners are matter of evidence which require to be substantiated only during trial and the same cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings.
Considered the submissions and perused the records.
6. Insofar as the allegations levelled against accused No.1 is concerned, I find prima-facie material on record to show 9 that accused No.1 produced an experience certificate purported to have been issued by accused No.5 to the effect that she was working in the Department of OBG in K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, Sullya from 09.08.2001 to 30.04.2003. The material collected by the investigating agency prima-facie discloses that the college was established only in the year 2002. The other material collected by the investigating agency reveals that during the year 2001-2002, accused No.1 had attended to large number of deliveries in Ramakrishna Nursing Home, Mandya and that accused No.1 did not work in K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, Sullya during the relevant time.
7. The contention of the petitioners that as per the Regulations, 1998 of Medical Council of India, New Delhi, Doctors are not required to serve as full time employees, cannot be considered at this stage. The subject certificate on the face of it discloses that accused No.1 has served as full time employee in K.V.G. Medical College & Hospital, Sullya and not as part time employee/Doctor as sought to be projected by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Even otherwise the said plea can be 10 urged only by way of defence in the course of trial and cannot be considered as a ground to quash the proceedings insofar as accused Nos.1 and 5 are concerned. Therefore, to that extent, I do not find any merit in the contention urged by the learned counsel for petitioners insofar as accused Nos.1 and 5 are concerned.
8. Insofar as accused Nos.3 and 4 are concerned, on going through the impunged charge sheet and the material produced alongwith the same, I do not find any material allegations against accused Nos.3 and 4 pointing out their involvement either in the issuance of the alleged experience certificate or in the appointment of accused No.1 based on the alleged experience certificate. All the allegations made in the charge sheet are directed mainly against accused No.1 and accused No.5. The only allegation made against accused Nos.3 and 4 is that certificates in favour of accused No.1 have been issued on their behalf by the Academy of Liberal Education, Kurunjibagh, Sullia. That by itself, does not render accused Nos.3 and 4 responsible for the alleged offences. In the absence 11 of any specific allegations constituting the ingredients of any of the above offences insofar as accused Nos.3 and 4 are concerned, in my view, the prosecution of accused Nos.3 and 4 for the above offences is unjustified and cannot be sustained. To this extent, petition filed by accused Nos.3 and 4 deserves to be allowed.
Hence, I pass the following order:-
1. Crl.P.No.4192/2016 filed by accused No.1 and Crl.P.No.6031/2016 filed by accused No.5 are dismissed.
2. Crl.P.No.7918/2016 filed by accused Nos.3 and 4 is allowed. Charge sheet in C.C.No.438/2016 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Mandya is quashed only insofar as accused No.3 and 4 are concerned.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-