Basayya Sindankeri vs The State and Others

Aravind Kumar, J.—1. Petitioner has sought for quashing of criminal proceedings registered against him in C.C. No. 4188/2014 by Brahmapur Police Station, Gulbarga, for the offences punishable under Sections 198, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC.

I have heard the arguments of Sri Shivanand Patil, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No. 1-State. Since respondent No. 2 is served and unrepresented, learned High Court Government Pleader has assisted the Court in disposing of the matter.

Sum and substance of prosecution case is that Police Inspector of Directorate, Civil Rights Enforcement Cell, Kalaburagi, had filed a complaint against petitioner alleging that Caste Verification Committee had referred the application of petitioner to Civil Rights Enforcement Cell to ascertain petitioner''s caste and on verification and investigation, it was found that petitioner belonged to Jangama caste which was verified from his school records and it has been indicated therein that petitioner as ''Hindu'', ''Hindu Lingayat'', ''Beda Jangama'' at different levels of his study. It was further alleged that petitioner had availed a caste certificate from the Tahsildar, Gulbarga, on 18.11.1988 and said Tahsildar had denied issuance of such certificate and as such, complainant alleged that petitioner had obtained false caste certificate by proclaiming himself as belonging to ''Beda Jangama-Scheduled Caste'', and based on said caste certificate he had secured employment in BEML, Mysore and thereby he has cheated the government.

It is the contention of Sri Shivanand Patil, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner that second respondent has acted in excess of his jurisdiction and complainant had no authority to lodge a complaint and initiate criminal proceedings against petitioner and proceedings initiated based on said complaint is premature and in gross violation of orders of Hon''ble Apex Court and this Court. He would submit that matter relating to the caste of petitioner was pending before District Caste Verification Committee and file has been closed in view of circulars issued by the government and as such, proceedings initiated against petitioner is bad in law.

Per contra, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that proceedings against petitioner having been initiated on account of a false and fabricated caste certificate being furnished by the petitioner and securing employment and now it has culminated in prosecution being initiated against petitioner after investigation and when prosecution is at the stage of trial being commenced proceedings are not required to be quashed.

Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records, it would indicate that Police Sub-Inspector, District Civil Rights Enforcement Cell-second respondent lodged a complaint before Station House Officer, Brahmapur Police Station on 26.03.2009 stating that as per school and college records relating to petitioner his caste is indicated as ''Hindu'', ''Hindu Lingayat''. On these grounds, it was alleged by the Police Sub-Inspector - second respondent that petitioner had obtained a false caste certificate and Tahsildar, Gulbarga had also intimated that no such certificate had been issued and as such, criminal prosecution came to be initiated against petitioner for having obtained false caste certificate and obtained benefit of it. Based on the said complaint, investigation was taken up and charge sheet came to be filed against petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 198, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC. At this juncture, it requires to be noticed that District Caste Verification Committee had also taken up investigation of the caste certificate issued to the petitioner and by virtue of Circular No. 47/S.A.D./5/Bangalore dated 30.06.2007 issued by Government of Karnataka indicating thereunder that if any caste certificates had been obtained prior to 1993 and subsequently, if any dispute had arisen with regard to such caste certificate, District Caste Verification Committee had no jurisdiction to decide the same. This resulted in closure of proceedings relating to petitioner''s caste certificate being examined by said committee.

There is no dispute with regard to the fact that caste certificate of petitioner was under scrutiny by District Caste Verification Committee and as on date it stands closed.

On the basis of the complaint lodged by second respondent, jurisdictional police have investigated and have filed charge sheet against petitioner as already noticed hereinabove. Similar issue came up for consideration before the Co-ordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Petition No. 15335/2013 namely as to whether prosecution can be continued against such persons who had obtained false Caste Certificate. This Court after having considered various facets involved in the issue held that without there being any direction from the District Verification Committee to initiate prosecution or concluding such certificate if false, Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement independently would have no jurisdiction to directly investigate into the matter or file charge sheet, when the procedure as contemplated under the extant Rules are not followed. It has been held that only after enquiry under Rule 7 of Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, Etc.) (Amendment) Rules, 1993, is held by competent District Caste Verification Committee or the appellate authority then it will have to send a report to the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement and only thereafter said cell can take steps to prosecute the persons who had falsely obtained such false certificate. In other words, it has been opined by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court that until and unless such report is forwarded by the District Caste Verification Committee to District Civil Rights Enforcement Cell, it would not have jurisdiction to initiate prosecution against persons who would have obtained false caste certificate.

It is not in dispute that in the instant case second respondent had suo-motto lodged a complaint before jurisdictional police-respondent No. 1 against petitioner on 26.03.2009 alleging that petitioner had obtained a false caste certificate by declaring himself as belonging to "Beda Jangama" though he belonged to "Lingayat" caste. Said complaint came to be registered in Crime No. 61/2009 by respondent No. 1 against petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 198, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC. After investigation, charge sheet has also been filed before IV-Additional JMFC, Kalaburagi, in C.C. No. 4188/2014 and trial is yet to commence. It is also not in dispute that District Caste Verification Committee has not forwarded any report to District Civil Rights Enforcement Cell. Hence, this Court if of the considered view that dicta laid down by this Court is squarely applicable to the facts on hand. Hence, prosecution cannot be proceed with against petitioner.

Yet another fact which also came to be considered by Co-ordinate Bench was whether all proceedings relating to false caste certificate would come to an end or not and was held in the negative. It was held in Criminal Petition No. 15335/2013 by order dated 30.03.2015 that where closure reports have been filed by the District Caste Verification Committee based on the circular issued by the appropriate Government, same has to be re-opened and investigated by such committees after affording an opportunity to the concerned person. As such, it was held that quashing of proceedings would not come in the way of District Caste Verification Committee to re-open the case, issue notice to the petitioner, investigate the matter and forward a report to the District Civil Rights Enforcement Cell for taking further action in the matter if it is found that such certificate is false. It is needless to state that in the event of District Caste Verification Committee were to forward a report by recording a finding against petitioner, second respondent-cell would be at liberty to proceed against petitioner in accordance with law by launching criminal prosecution.

Hence, for the reasons indicated hereinabove, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

"i. Criminal Petition is hereby allowed;

ii. Proceedings in C.C. No. 4188/2014 pending on the file of IV-Additional JMFC Court, Kalaburagi, at Annexure-B is hereby quashed.

iii. Quashing of proceeding would not come in the way of District Caste Verification Committee initiating proceedings as observed hereinabove and in the event of said Committee forwarding a report to the District Civil Rights Enforcement Cell (Second respondent) concluding caste certificate of petitioner is false, 2nd respondent authority would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law as observed hereinabove;"