- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2828 CRL.P No. 101954 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101954 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. ARATI D/O. CHANNAVEERAYYA MATH AGED 33 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. SHIVAGIRI, DHARWAD, NOW R/O. HOUSE NO.46, PEARL BUILDING, PAVAN COLONY, 2ND CROSS, NEAR LAKSHMI NARAYAN TEMPLE, KALYAN NAGAR, DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.I.GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS RON POLICE STATION, RON CIRCLE, DIST. GADAG, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, DHARWAD. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DIRECTORATE CIVIL RIGHTS AND ENFORCEMENT, BENGALURU HEAD QUARTERS, F BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, KHB, KAVERI BAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-09, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; SRI. C.JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.70/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG IN CR.NO.12/2024 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 5(A) OF THE KARNATAKA SCHEDULED CASTES, SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.19 13:15:41 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2828 CRL.P No. 101954 of 2024 (RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENTS ETC.,) ACT, 1990 SECTION 3(1) (q) OF THE KARNATAKA SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT) 2015 AND SECTIONS AND 420 OF IPC LODGED BY RON POLICE STATION, RON CIRCLE, DIST.GADAG SO FAR IT RELATES TO ACCUSED NO.1-PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner (Accused No.1) is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Section 5(A) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990, Section 3(1)(q) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. 2. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner fraudulently obtained a caste certificate on 09.09.2003, claiming that he belongs to the Beda Jangama community, which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe. Based on this certificate, the petitioner secured employment as a clerk at Corporation Bank. The caste certificate obtained by the petitioner was subsequently canceled and referred to the District Caste Verification Committee for validation. After conducting an inquiry, the Committee rejected the validation of the caste certificate on 16.03.2023. 3. The petitioner challenged the rejection of validation before the Appellate Authority, which set aside the Committee’s order on 30.09.2014 and remanded the matter for fresh - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2828 CRL.P No. 101954 of 2024 consideration. Subsequently, based on the order of the Committee rejecting the caste certificate, Respondent No.2 lodged an FIR on 14.01.2024, following the recommendation of the Additional Director General of Police. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this petition was examined by this Court in Crl.P No.8655/2021 (DD 01.04.2024), wherein, at paragraphs 7 to 10, it was held as follows: “7. Rule 7A of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Rules, 1992, deals with the prosecution for obtaining a false caste certificate. It states that the Caste Verification Committee or, as the case may be, the Divisional Commissioner, shall send a copy of the order rejecting the claim for a Validity Certificate to the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement. The Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement shall then take steps to prosecute the person who obtained the false caste certificate. In this case, however, the Additional Director General of Police recommended prosecution, which does not comply with Rule 7A.” 8. Since the District Caste Verification Committee did not recommend prosecution as required under Rule 7A of the 1992 Rules, the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement lacked the competence to lodge the FIR. Consequently, the charge sheet filed by the police, based on the FIR lodged by the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement, is rendered invalid. 9. The petitioner has filed an appeal against the order canceling the caste certificate under Section 4D of the 1990 Act, and the appeal is pending consideration before the Appellate Authority. As long as the appeal remains pending, the FIR lodged by the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement is without authority. 10. Section 3(1)(q) of the 2015 Act states that a person who provides false information to a public servant, causing that public servant to use their lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, shall be punished accordingly. However, merely furnishing false information to obtain a caste certificate does not constitute an - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2828 CRL.P No. 101954 of 2024 offence under this provision. This section can only be invoked if the petitioner had provided false information to a public servant to cause harm or annoyance to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe member. In the present case, the essential ingredients of an offence under Section 3(1)(q) of the 2015 Act are conspicuously absent. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the legal process.” 5. In the instant case, the FIR was lodged based on the recommendation of the Additional Director General of Police, and the rejection of the validation certificate has been set aside by the Appellate Authority. The matter is still pending reconsideration before the District Caste Verification Committee. Under these circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in Spl.C No.70/2024 pending on the file of the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, is hereby aside. ii) Liberty is reserved to the respondent No.2 to initiate such an action if it is permissible in law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10