GANGULA GOVARDHAN REDDY Vs. STATE OF TS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are accused in Cr.No.1458 of 2016 of L.B.Nagar Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, outcome of the report of the 2nd respondent who is the student of Mahatma Gandhi Law College for which A.1 Secretary-cum-Correspondent, A.2 is the Principal and A.3 is the Computer Operator and she is now shown as practicing advocate and the crime registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 420 IPC & Section 3(2) (V(a)) of SC/ST (POA) of Amended Act, 2015 dated 30.12.2016 which report reads in nut shell that she studied in the college 5 years law course during 2011 - 2016 June with Admission No.2332.

(2.) On 22.11.2016, consequent to the High Court orders in W.P.No.39922 of 2016, the Convenor, Telangana LAWCET displayed the fee structure for the block period from 2011-2018 on the official website by letter dated 23, 25-11-2016 through which the defacto complainant came to know that the Government prescribed RS.9,600/- per annum (plus Rs.1000/- Registration fee, Rs.1000/- Student related special fee and Rs.500/- refundable Library deposit) for LLB (3 YDC and 5 YDC) course respectively in block periods supra and A.1 as Secretary and Correspondent of the College, A.2 Principal and A.3 Computer Operator in collusion with 6 others collected Rs.9,600/-+ Rs.4,500/- on the ground of her caste for the academic years 2011-2016 though they are empowered to collect as referred supra Rs.9,600/- + Rs.2,500/- and thereby collected about Rs.2,000/- excessively per annum and further fraudulently extorted Rs.9,600/- on 29.08.2016 for giving back the original academic certificates and for issuing TC consolidated Memo and bonafide certificates on the pretext of pendency of her scholarship with Government of Telangana which is contrary to Order No.796/Stat/Acad/2012, dated 6-7-2012 of Registrar, Osmania University thereby the acts of the accused attract the penal consequences. Therefore, for the offences stated supra, the crime was registered which now sought for quashment.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner contends that very prosecution is unsustainable and the bonafides collected whatever as per the Government norms more particularly from the letter of APSCHE/LAW/Special FEE/2008, dated 26.09.2008 of A.P.State Council of Higher Education addressed to the President of the Private Law Colleges Management Association of what are the guidelines covered by G.O.Ms.No.216 dated 11.09.2008 equally applicable to all unaided private law colleges by enclosed the said G.O.Ms.No.216 as per which Rs.9,600/- + Rs.4,500/- is legally being collectable even from the face value of the allegations stated supra no offence is made out and thereby the continuation of crime proceedings are nothing but to abuse and liable to be quashed.