logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 266 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Karnataka
Case No : Writ Petition No.7162 Of 2026 (EDN-RES)
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
Parties : Dr. T.M. Parthasaradhi Reddy Versus The State Of Karnataka, Rep. By Its Secretary, Medical Education Department, Bengaluru & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Y.R. Sadashiva Reddy, Senior Counsel, Rahul S. Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, B. Sukanya Baliga, AGA, R2 & R3, S.S. Ravishnkar, R4, Farah Fathima, Advocates.
Date of Judgment : 17-03-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Articles 226 & 227 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC 15585,
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the Respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to continue his Course Upto May/June-2026 and further permit him to appear for examination; and etc.)

Oral Order

1. In this petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to continue the Super Speciality Course - Master of Chirurgiae (Urology) at the respondent No.2-Institute and to appear in the ensuing examination to be held during May/June-2026.

2. The relevant facts for adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner studied M.B.B.S. from the Narayana Medical College, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh and joined to Super Speciality Course - Master of Chirurgiae (Urology) in the respondent No.2-Institute. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner has been permitted to appear for final examination scheduled during the month of November-2025 by issuing Hall Ticket as per Annexure-A, however, the petitioner could not appear for the examination during the month of November- 2025 due to the threat of arrest by the Police in Crime No.179/2025 registered by the Madanapally Police, Andhra Pradesh for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 318(2), 105 and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 18, 19 and 21 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994. It is also stated that, in view of alleged involvement of the petitioner in the aforementioned offences, he was not able to attend the classes and for examination. Hence, this petition by the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri. Y.R. Sadashiva Reddy, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri. Rahul S. Reddy, appearing for the petitioner; Smt. Sukanya Baliga B., learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1; Sri. Ravishankar S.S., learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3; and Smt. Farah Fathima, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.

4. Sri. Y.R. Sadashiva Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, on the basis of false allegations made by Media against the petitioner, the Madanapally Police have registered the criminal case against the petitioner in Crime No.179/2025 for the alleged offences. Learned Senior Counsel also submits that the petitioner was enlarged on Bail by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madanapally in Criminal Miscellaneous No.359/2025 on 05th January, 2026 and therefore, there is no impediment for the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue his course and appear for the ensuing examination to be held during May/June-2026. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

5. Per contra, Sri. Ravishankar S.S., learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 submits that the petitioner is accused in Crime No.179/2025 and therefore, the same would come in the way of allowing the petitioner to pursue the Course and appear for examination. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

6. Smt. Farah Fathima, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4-University opposed the contentions of the petitioner.

7. In the light of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, there is no dispute that the petitioner is accused in Crime No.179/2025 registered by the Madanapally Police, Andhra Pradesh State. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was enlarged on Bail on 05th January, 2026 by the Competent Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.359/2025. In that view of the matter, the criminal case registered against the petitioner is yet to be adjudicated after full fledge trial. Therefore, at this juncture, the petitioner cannot be considered and held to be participated in the alleged crime. Accordingly, I find force in the submission made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

8. Under these circumstances, respondents 2 and 3 are directed to permit the petitioner to continue his Course in the respondent No.2-Insitute till the completion of the Course during the month of May/June-2026. The respondent No.4- Univesity shall permit the petitioner to appear for the ensuing examination subject to the eligibility of the petitioner. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed.
 
  CDJLawJournal