Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010200542018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6212/2018 NITASHA DAS AND 5 ORS. D/O. SRI AJANTA NARAYAN DAS, R/O. HOUSE NO. 164, CHHAYGAON, P.O. AND P.S. CHHAYGAON, DIST. KAMRUP (R), ASSAM-781124. 2: ASHABARI DAS D/O. SRI NARAYAN CH. DAS @ NARAYAN DAS R/O. WARD NO. 14 NABA GOPAL SARMA ROAD HAILAKANDI P.O. AND P.S. HAILAKANDI DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM-788152. 3: ANUP DAS S/O. SRI JOGESH CH. DAS R/O. VILL. GOSAIGAON (MANGALDAI) P.O. AND P.S. MANGALDAI DIST. DARRANG ASSAM-784125. 4: DEVID KUMAR MALI S/O. SRI BOLINDRA MALI R/O. VILL. BAIHATA P.O. BAIHATA P.S. KAMALPUR DIST. KAMRUP (R) ASSAM-781380. 5: TAMAL BISWAS S/O. SRI SUBRATA BISWAS Page No.# 2/6 R/O. TILAK DEKA ROAD NAGAON TOWN P.O. NAGAON P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM-782001. 6: MS. BIPASHA ROY D/O. SRI PRODIP KUMAR ROY R/O. VILL. PINNAGAR P.O. GIRISH GANJ BAZAR P.S. KARIMGANJ DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM-788734 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY., WP(T) AND BC DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI ASSAM GUWAHATI-781007. 4:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM-785001. 5:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE JORHAT P.S. AT JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM-785001. 6:SRI ABHIJIT HAZARIKA Page No.# 3/6 THE PRESIDENT JORHAT DISTRICT COMMITTEE ALL ASSAM SCHEDULE CASTE STUDENTS UNION JORHAT P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM-785001. 7:JAYANTA DAS SHASTRI THE SECRETARY JORHAT DISTRICT COMMITTEE ALL ASSAM SCHEDULE CASTE STUDENTS UNION JORHAT P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT DIST. JORBAT ASSAM-785001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAUHAN, MR. A R SHOME,MR. S CHAUHAN,MS S K CHAUHAN,MR. P MAZUMDER,MR. N ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT,MR R M DAS Linked Case : WP(C)/3528/2019 BIPASHA ROY D/O SRI PRODIP KUMAR ROY R/O VILL. PINNAGAR P.O. GIRISHGANJ BAZAR P.S. KARIMGANJ DIST.-KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN-788710 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM WPT AND BC DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 Page No.# 4/6 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 4:THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DEPTT. REP. THROUGH ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 5:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE CID POLICE STATION ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 6:THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER (I/O) CID P.S. CASE NO. 05/2019 REGISTERED U/S 120B/468/471 IPC 7:JAYANTA MOHAN DAS CHIEF SECRETARY CONFEDERATION OF SCHEDULE CASTE AND TRIBE ORGANIZATIONS (COSCTO) S/O LT. GANDHI DAS VILL. SONPUR WARD NO. 9 P.O. NALBARI P.S. NALBARI DIST.-NALBARI ASSAM PIN-781335 ------------ Advocate for : MR. S CHAUHAN Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 12-08-2025 Both the writ petitions being filed with identical causes of action are taken up for an analogous hearing and are disposed of by this common order. In the first writ petition being WP(C)/6212/2018, there are 6 nos. of petitioners Page No.# 5/6 whereas in the second writ petition, i.e. WP(C)/3528/2019, there is one petitioner. As per the facts projected, all the petitioners were admitted in the Jorhat Medical College in the MBBS Course under the Schedule Caste (SC) Category. While they were pursuing their course, FIR was lodged by an organization, namely, All Assam Schedule Caste Students Union whereby it was stated that the claim of the petitioners to fall under SC category was false. Based on the said FIR, police case was lodged and at that stage, the petitioners had approached this Court. While these cases were considered at the motion stage, this Court had taken into consideration the law laid down in this subject by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors. reported (1994) 6 SCC 241 . As per the said decision, an allegation of the present nature is to be looked into by a Scrutiny Committee which has already been constituted pursuant to such guidelines. This Court was also apprised of a decision rendered by this Court in the case of Abhishek Chandra @ Sachin Besarya Vs State of Tripura & Ors. reported in 2011 (4) GLT 431. Shri S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that resorting to filing of a police case is not permissible in view of such guidelines and it is the jurisdiction of the Scrutiny Committee which has been constituted as per the direction in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) which will have the authority to look into the matter. Shri N. Das, learned State Counsel has submitted that the competent authority to look into a dispute of the present nature would be Scrutiny Committee. He has however added that in case the present petitions are allowed, the complainant in this case may be permitted to approach the competent committee as the issue involves are serious wherein the interest of genuine candidates who would be deprived of are involved. Shri C. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Social Empowerment Department has endorsed the views expressed by the learned State Counsel. Page No.# 6/6 This Court has perused the Office Notes connected to this writ petitions from where it appears that the private respondents who were the complainants have been served and they have chosen not to appear. The issue involved is with regard to the action of the private respondents to lodge police case on the suspicion that the petitioners, who had taken admission into the MBBS Course in the Jorhat Medical College on the basis of SC category do not actually belong to the said category. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the parties, such issues are to be looked into by the duly constituted Scrutiny Committee as per the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra). Taking recourse of lodging an FIR would not be the correct recourse of action. This Court has also noted that while issuing notice, there is an interim order not to proceed further with the respective police cases. After considering of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners have made out a case for interference. Accordingly, the police cases being Jorhat PS Case No. 401/2018 registered under Section 420/468/471 IPC and CID PS Case No. 5/2019 registered u/s 120-B/468/471 IPC are quashed. The present order however shall not be a predicament for the private respondents to take up the issue before the duly constituted Scrutiny Committee as indicated above. Both the writ petitions accordingly stand allowed. Interim order passed earlier made absolute. JUDGE Comparing Assistant