- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1592 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI N. MADAN GOPAL S/O LATE NANJUNDAIAH AGE ABOUT 69 YEARS R/A NO.46/1 MARUTHI TIMBERS BANDEEPALYA, GARVEBHAVIPALYA HOSURUMAIN ROAD BENGALURU - 560 068. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SOMASHEKAR RAJAVAMSHI, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HALASURUGATE POLILCE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF ADVOCATE GENERAL HIGHCOURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SRI N. KUMARASWAMY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS DRE CELL, BENGALURU HEAD QUARTER F BLOCK 2ND FLOOR, CAUVERYBHAVAN K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 06.05.2025 IN SPL.C.NO.624/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT U/S 227 OF CR.P.C. Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Accused is before this Court in this criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 06.05.2025 in Spl.C.No.624/2023 passed by the Court of LXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner is charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 177, 181, 196, 198 and 420 of IPC and Section 3(1)(q) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST (POA) Act' for short) and case has been registered against him before the Special Court in Spl.C.No.624/2023. In the said proceedings, the petitioner had filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 to discharge him from the charge sheeted offences. The said application was opposed by the prosecution by filing objections. The Trial Court, vide the impugned order has rejected the said application and aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that complainant in the present case is not a member of SC/ST community and therefore, charge sheet could not have been filed invoking the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act. He also submits that there is no material in the charge sheet which would attract the alleged offences against the petitioner and the Trial Court has failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspects of the matter and has erred in dismissing the application filed for discharge. In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Yamuna vs. The State (Crl.RP.No.989/2012 C/w Crl.RP.No.988/2012) disposed off on 11.01.2022. 5. Learned HCGP, on the other hand, has supported the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 6. The allegation against the petitioner in the charge sheet is that though petitioner originally belongs to Vanniyar Caste, on 24.07.2018, by giving a false information to the Tahsildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru, that he belongs to Adi Dravida Caste, which is considered as a Scheduled Caste, he had obtained a Caste Certificate based on which he had filed multiple criminal cases against others and also had claimed benefits under the said fraudulent caste certificate obtained by him. 7. It is not in dispute that the Caste Certificate which was obtained by the petitioner based on fraudulent documents has been subsequently set-aside by the competent authority. Undisputedly, the order cancelling the Caste Certificate of the petitioner has not been challenged till date. 8. Section 3(1)(q) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, reads as follows:- "3. Punishments for offences atrocities.— [(1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,— xxx - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 (q) gives any false or frivolous information to any public servant and thereby causes such public servant to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe;" 9. The allegation made in the charge sheet against the petitioner clearly attracts the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(q) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The petitioner allegedly has obtained fraudulent Caste Certificate on the basis of created and forged documents and therefore, even the other offences alleged against him under the provisions of Indian Penal Code also get attracted and the prosecution has collected necessary material in support of the charge sheeted offences which is now filed against the petitioner. The Trial Court having appreciated the aforesaid aspects of the matter has rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. At this stage, it is not necessary for the Trial Court to hold a mini-trial and give a finding on the material collected by the prosecution. The judgment on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. In the said case, the offence - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8638 CRL.RP No. 1592 of 2025 punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST(POA) Act, was invoked and not the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(q) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The required ingredients for prosecuting a person for the aforesaid two offences are altogether different and distinct. Therefore, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 10. In view of the disposal of the main petition, pending introductory application, if any, does not survive for consideration. Hence, the same is disposed off. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35