SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25817

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
Ashok S. Kinagi, J
DAYANAND GOPAL SHEGUNASI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP No. 109355 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Avinash M Angadi
For the Respondents: T. Hanama Reddy, Bailappa C. Belagavi

Investigation of offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, must be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as mandated by Rule 7 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995.

Headnote:(A) Investigation Procedure - SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Rank of Investigating Officer - Investigation of offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act must be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as per Rule 7 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995; investigation by a Police Inspector is contrary to law and void. (Para 13, 15, 16)

(B) Administrative Law - Notice Issuance - Authority of Law - Notices issued by an officer lacking the statutory authority to investigate the underlying offence are without authority of law and liable to be quashed. (Para 18)

Issues: Whether the investigation of an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act conducted by a Police Inspector is legally valid.

Table of Content
1. background of the writ petition and the specific notices challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. contentions regarding the authority of the investigating officer and the complainant's history. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. statutory requirement for a deputy superintendent of police to investigate sc/st act offences. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. invalidity of investigation and notices issued by an officer below the mandated rank. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
5. quashing of unauthorized notices while reserving liberty for lawful investigation. (Para 19)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO,

(A) GRANT AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING NOTICE GIVEN BY RESPONDENT NO.03 TO PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 35(3) OF BNSS-2023 VIDE LETTER DATED 02.12.2025 IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-C.

(B) GRANT AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING NOTICE GIVEN BY RESPONDENT NO.03 TO PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 94 OF BNSS-2023 BEARING NO.PRAKARANA/DCRE/01/NAHAJANE/BELAGAVI/2025/672, VIDE LETTER DATED 02.12.2025 IS HEREWITH PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-D.

(C) GRANT AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 to 5 TO PRODUCE THE CASTE CERTIFICATE OF THE RESPONDENT NO.6.

(D) GRANT AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 to 3 TO GRANT 10 DAYS TIME TO APPEAR BEFORE THEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION.

(E) TO HAND OVER THE INVESTIGATION IN CRIME NO.01/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 TO SOME OTHER INVESTIGATION AGENCIES IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

(F) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

1. The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the notice dated 02.12.2025 issued by the respondent No.3 to the petitioner under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 vide Annexure-C and to quash the notice under Section 94 of BNSS, 2023 dated 02.12.2025 vide Annexure-D.

2. Brief facts, leading rise to filing of this petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner is working as a Police Inspector in CCB, Huballi-Dharwad City. The petitioner earlier was serving as a Police Inspector at Suburban Police Station, Dharwad, from September 2023 to October 2025. On 26.11.2025, respondent No.2/DCRE issued a notice to the petitioner through WhatsApp by the personal number of the police constable, after receiving the said notice as per Annexure-A, the petitioner acknowledged the same, replied to the notice on 30.11.2025 further without looking to the reply respondent No.3/Police inspector of DCRE Police Station, Belagavi sent and another notice under Sections 35(3) and 94 of BNSS, 2023 on 02.02.2025 pertaining to the FIR Crime No.1 of 2025 which was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 75(2) and 170(3) of BNS, 2023 Act and Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii)and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Amendment Act, 2015. The said notice specifically state that, in order to file a charge sheet against the petitioner, he is required to be present before the respondents on 05.12.2025 for enquiry. Further, petitioner contented that, a complaint was filed against the petitioner in Crime No.1 of 2025. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 without verifying the allegations and caste certificate of the complainant in Crime No.1 of 2025. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 with ulterior motive registered a case against the petitioner under the said Act.

The petitioner aggrieved by the notice, has filed this writ petition.

4. Respondent No.6 filed a statement of objection, contending that, the petition filed by the petitioner is premature and attempt to obstruct and derail a lawful

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top