Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
K. Natarajan, J.
Savithri @ Savithramma —Petitioner
versus
State of Karnataka through
Station House Officer Sira
Police Station and Anr. —Respondents
Criminal Petition No.8857 of 2018
Decided on 19.4.2022
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Sri Bharath Kumar V., Advocate
For the Respondents: Sri Vinayaka V.S, HCGP for R-1/State
For the Respondents: Sri. Jagadish - Spl. Standing Counsel for R-2
IMPORTANT POINT
Production of fake caste certificate to secure job – If any offence is committed prior to commencement of Penal Act, the person cannot be punished for non-existing law.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 198, 196, 199 and 420 – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Sections 3(1)(ix) – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Constitution of India – Article 20(1) – Production of fake caste certificate to secure job – Quashing petition – Petitioner is a Brahmin by birth and she married to a person belonging to ‘Nayak’ caste which falls under Scheduled Tribe – She had also secured job by obtaining a certificate as Scheduled Tribe – In 1974 she married to Nayak community person – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1988, came into force only in 1989 – If any offence was committed prior to commencement of Penal Act, the person cannot be punished for non-existing law – Petitioner had no criminal intention in initial stage while obtaining certificate and seeking reservation and got appointment – She bonafidely believed that she will get caste of her husband in view of marrying the person who belongs to member of SC/ST – She had no intention to cheat any person belonging to any SC/ST and denial of employment opportunity to person of SC/ST community – Continuing criminal proceedings against petitioner is abuse of process of law, which is liable to be quashed – Criminal proceedings against petitioner quashed. (Paras 7 and 11)
Result: Criminal Petition allowed. Criminal proceedings quashed.
ORDER
K. Natarajan, J.—This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the criminal proceedings in Special CC.No.326/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 198, 196, 199 and 420 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(ix) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 herein after referred as SC/ST (POA) Act, pending on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Court, Tumkur.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for petitioner, learned HCGP for the State-respondent No.1 and Special Standing Counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent No.2 filed a complaint to the police on 02.04.2018 which was registered as Crime No.163/2018 for the above said offences alleging that the petitioner who is said to belong to Brahmin community by birth and during the year 1974 she had married to one A.M. Suryanarayana Nayak, who is said to be belonging to the ‘Nayak’ caste which was classified under Scheduled Tribe. Subsequent to the marriage of the petitioner she was residing with her husband and followed her husband’s caste. Subsequently she applied for a caste certificate, claiming her caste as Scheduled Tribe. Accordingly she obtained the caste certificate and also secured a job with the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) and was appointed as Second Division Clerk and posted at Commercial Tax Department. Subsequently the Caste Verification Committee verified the certificate and annulled the certificate stating that she cannot claim her husband’s caste as she is Brahmin by birth as per her SSLC certificate. Thereafter she was dismissed from service on 28.4.2012, hence the complaint came to be registered against her, which is under challenge.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended though the petitioner was a Brahmin by birth but by marrying to a ‘Nayak’ community person, she followed the husband’s caste and at that time the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “N.E. Horo Vs Jahanara Jaipal Sing” reported in (1972) 1 SCC 771, was in force and in the judgment it was clearly held that after marrying the member of the SC/ST the girl also becomes the caste of her husband until the later judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court which was declared only in the year 1996 in the case of Valsamma Paul’s Vs Cochin University reported in (1996) 3 SCC 545 and therefore she was terminated from the service and also contended that she has no criminal intention to cheat the authorities, but she bonafidely believed herself the caste of her husband and secured the job. Therefore, prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings.
5. Per contra, the counsel for the respondent No.2 who appeared for Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement (DCRE) has objected the petition and contended that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of G.S. Vasantha Lakshmi Vs State of Karnataka has categorically held that the Brahmin lady will not get the right of caste of her husband merely by marrying the member of the SC/ST and Supreme Court has categorically held in Valsamma Paul’s case that the wife will not get the status of husband, merely marrying SC/ST person and no reservation is available under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. The matter requires for adjudication, hence prayed for dismissing the petition.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader also objected the petition.
7. Having heard the arguments of both the parties and perusal of the records, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is a Brahmin by birth and she married to a person belonging to ‘Nayak’ caste which falls under Scheduled Tribe. She had also secured job by obtaining a certificate as Scheduled Tribe and was appointed as SDA and posted to Commercial Tax Department. It is also an admitted fact, subsequently the caste verification committee had annulled the caste certificate and thereafter she was terminated from service. Subsequently, the case c
