Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Kar) 249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH
RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR, J.
Smt.Kalpana D/o Dhaku Shirale - Petitioners
Vs.
State of Karnataka, Through Manvi Police Station, Represented by Addl. State Public Prosecutor., High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench - Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201233/2019
Decided On : 17-06-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant : Sri Arun Choudapurkar
For The Respondent: Sri Gururaj V.Hasilkar

Point of law : Power of the High Court for quashing the criminal proceedings in order to avoid abuse of process of law. But, when prima facie there is sufficient material evidence placed on record, there is no question of abuse of process of law.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 198, 420, 415 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sections 482, 397 – Caste Certificate – Bail – Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash order in Crl.Rev.P, passed by IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raichur, by confirming order passed in C.C. on file of Civil Judge arid JMFC Court, Manvi. – Present petitioner in pursuance of summons issued to her appeared before Magistrate and she was enlarged on bail – She filed an application for discharge and Magistrate, by order, discharged petitioner from alleged charges. –
Finding of the Court:
Question of quashing proceedings does not arise at all – Had petitioner directly applied under General category, things would have been different, but she has applied under reserve category with a certificate pertaining to reserve category, to which she doesn't belonged, but was selected under Genera! Category – Under these circumstances matter requires detail trial and petitioner during course of trial can place material that she had no intention to cheat or caste certificate obtained well prior to applying this post – It is also necessary to consider as to what was application submitted, who has submitted an application for issuing caste certificate, what are contents of application, whether earlier caste certificate was issued in favour of parents of petitioner are required to be verified and then only intention of petitioner, whether she had intention to cheat or not can be tested and this requires a detail trial. – Power of High Court for quashing criminal proceedings in order to avoid abuse of process of law – Principle enunciated in decision reported in case of Prof.R.K. Vijayasarathy (supra), cannot be made applicable to facts and circumstances of case on hand – Petition is not maintainable and proceedings cannot be quashed – Order of Sessions Judge in this regard is just and proper and learned Magistrate has superficially considered only fact that she was not selected under reserved category and she was only selected under General category, and proceeded to discharge her from duty, which was unwarranted – Sessions Judge has rightly set-aside order of Magistrate – Petition needs to be rejected.
Result : petition rejected

ORDER :

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘Cr.P.C’) praying to quash the order dated 18.12.2017 in Crl.Rev.P.No.19/2017, passed by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raichur, by confirming the order dated 06.12.2016 passed in C.C.No.138/2016 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Manvi.

2. The factual matrix leading to the case are that, the petitioner had obtained a caste certificate claiming to be she belonging to ‘Mogera’ caste, which comes under the Schedule Caste and applied for the post of Primary School Teacher, in the year 19961997 and later on, she was appointed in Raichur District. She joined the duties and she is serving as a Teacher. In the meanwhile, certain complaints have been made to the Enforcement Authority, regarding the petitioner obtaining a false certificate making allegation that she doesn't belong to ‘Mogera’ community and she obtained a false certificate and obtained her employment under the reservation category. On the basis of this information, a complaint came to be lodged and the Investigating Officer after conducting investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner/accused for the offence punishable under Section 198 and 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC').

3. The present petitioner in pursuance of summons issued to her appeared before the learned Magistrate and she was enlarged on bail. Thereafter, she filed an application for discharge and the learned Magistrate, by order dated 06.12.2016, discharged the petitioner from the alleged charges.

4. The said order is being challenged by the prosecution before the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raichur in Crl.R.P.No.19/2017, by filing the petition under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties, allowed the revision preferred by the State under Sections 397 and 399 of Cr.P.C and set aside the order passed by the learned Magistrate, discharging the present petitioner vide order dated 06.12.2016 in C.C.No.138/2016.

5. The order of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raichur is being challenged in this petition by the petitioner.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegations made against the petitioner are malafide and ill-motivated. That the petitioner had applied to the post of Teacher in 19961997 and she was selected under General category.

He further contended that she never misrepresented for the said post and she was appointed under General category and as such, there is no question of cheating the Scheduled Caste people or Government, by using her false caste certificate. The records does establish that though she belongs to a different caste. She has applied for the post in General merit category and was selected and hence, question of cheating doesn't arise at all. That petitioner is in service since, 1996-1997 and she has again subjected to harassment and there is no prima facie material against her and hence, it is sought for allowing the petition by setting aside the order of the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur by restoring the order of the learned Magistrate.

7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has specifically asserted that the petitioner with ill-motive has obtained a caste certificate of ‘Mogera’ caste though she does not belongs to said caste and she belongs to ‘Baandevesta’ caste, which doesn’t fall under Scheduled Caste category. He asserted that though she was selected under General merit, she has applied under Schedule Caste category and she would have taken the benefit of the caste throughout her service and it is evident from her conduct and her intention can be inferred. Hence, he contended that the matter requires a detail consideration and sought for rejection of the petition.

8. Having heard the arguments and on perusing the records, it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner belongs to ‘Baandeveste’ caste. It is also an undisputed fact that she did obtained a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document