The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior has dismissed a petition filed by Kangaroo Kids International Preschool and its operating company challenging an FIR registered over alleged non-compliance with directions related to disclosure of school books and their prices.
Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke held that the institution could not avoid its regulatory responsibilities merely by claiming that it functioned as a franchisee and had no control over the school’s website.
The petition was filed by Kangaroo Kids International Preschool, Gwalior, along with Palakk Academy of Learning Private Limited, which operates the school. The school approached the High Court seeking quashing of a show-cause notice dated March 26, 2026, and an FIR registered as Crime No.101/2026.
According to the petitioners, the FIR was lodged under Section 223(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, after authorities alleged that the school failed to publish details of prescribed books, their prices, and seller information as directed by the Collector.
The school argued that it had already submitted a reply to the show-cause notice on March 27, 2026, but the authorities registered the FIR without properly considering its explanation.
Counsel appearing for the school submitted that the institution was only a franchise unit of Kangaroo Kids International Preschool and did not independently manage or control the official website.
The petitioners told the court that the website was operated by Lighthouse Learning Private Limited, which allegedly held the copyright over the platform and controlled all its contents. The school claimed it had no authority to upload or modify information on the website.
It was also argued that the study material and curriculum were developed and supplied by the franchise headquarters through authorised vendors. The school maintained that it had no role in deciding the pricing, printing, or publication of educational material.
Relying on these submissions, the petitioners contended that the FIR and consequential actions were arbitrary and legally unsustainable.
After hearing the parties, the High Court noted that the Collector’s directions were issued to ensure transparency regarding school books and related complaints about arbitrary sale of educational material.
The court observed that the reply submitted by the petitioners did not provide any “specific or satisfactory explanation” regarding compliance with the directions.
Rejecting the franchise-related defence, Justice Phadke remarked that the institution could not shift responsibility to the website operator.
“The students are admitted in the institution managed by the petitioners and all educational activities are being carried out under their supervision and administration,” the bench observed.
The court further stated that lawful directions issued by authorities could not be avoided merely because the school claimed limited control over the website infrastructure.
Calling the explanation “vague, evasive, and misconceived,” the bench noted that the petitioners had not shown any concrete steps taken to comply with the Collector’s directions.
The High Court also reiterated that it would not ordinarily interfere with an ongoing investigation under Article 226 of the Constitution unless there was a clear abuse of process or patent illegality. According to the court, no such exceptional circumstance existed in the present matter.
The court also declined to accept the petitioners’ reliance on an earlier Division Bench judgment, observing that the facts of that case were different and distinguishable from the present dispute.
Holding that no ground for interference was made out, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and refused to quash the show-cause notice or the FIR registered against the petitioners.
Case Title: Kangaroo Kids International Pre School & Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 13805 of 2026
