View
215
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2015
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.15335/2013
Between:
Smt. Jayshree W/o MarularaghyaAge: 49 years, Occ: HouseholdR/o H.No.11-1400-59/6,Basava Sada, Shivanagar,Biddapur Colony, Afzalpur Road,Gulbarga.
… Petitioner
(By Sri Shivanand Patil, Advocate)
And:
1. The StateThrough Brahmapur P.S.
2. The StateThrough DYSP Dist. Civil Rights,Enforcement Cell, Gulbarga.
… Respondents
(By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP for R1, Sri C. Jagadish Advocate for R2)
R
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,praying to quash the entire Criminal Proceedings against thepetitioner in Crime No.90/2012 of Brahmapur Police Station,Gulbarga.
This petition coming on for hearing this day, the Courtmade the following:
O R D E R
The petitioner has sought for quashing of entire
proceedings registered against her in Crime No.90/2012
of Brahmapur police station, Gulbarga, for the offence
punishable under Sections 198, 420, 465, 468 & 471 of
IPC and under Section 3(1)(ix) of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2. I have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel for the petitioner. Sri C.Jagadish, Advocate has
filed a memo of appearance on behalf of respondent
No.2. The learned High Court Government Pleader
3
appearing for respondent No.1 has in fact assisted the
Court in disposing of the matter.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on
27.07.2012 at about 20.00 hours, the Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Cell
Directorate, Gulbarga, lodged a First Information Report
stating that one Sri Baburo Badiger, Principal Secretary,
SC/ST Civil Rights Protection State Committee has
informed making allegations against 81 persons
particularly showing name of the petitioner at item No.46,
alleging that this petitioner was working as a Junior
Assistant in KSRTC Divisional Office at Gulbarga. On
13.12.1986 she obtained a caste certificate specifically
mentioning her caste as “Beda Jangama” recognized as
scheduled caste. On the basis of such caste certificate
issued by the City Corporation of Gulbarga, she
4
persuaded the KSRTC Department and obtained a job.
Therefore, it is alleged that she committed the offences
under the above said provisions. It is also alleged that
complainant herself has sent the said caste certificate to
the State Level Caste Verification Committee on
11.10.1999 and the said application was referred to the
District Committee on 04.07.2000. It is further stated
that the Deputy Commissioner-cum-President, District
Verification Committee, Gulbarga, has given a report that
the said lady (petitioner herein) due to her ill health she
voluntarily submitted the resignation to the concerned
Department, therefore, the said application was disposed
of without passing any order on merits. It is also stated in
the complaint that the City Corporation of Gulbarga, vide
its circular dated 21.08.1989 cancelled all the caste
certificates issued by them. Prior to the constitution of
5
the committee by virtue of the directions of the State
Government, authorities who have issued the certificates
had competency to cancel the same. On that ground
holding that according to the Government circular the
certificate issued so far as petitioner is concerned has
been cancelled. Therefore, there is no necessity for once
again referring the certificate to the committee for
consideration, as such, it is a fit case, wherein the criminal
prosecution can be launched on such basis.
4. It appears on the above FIR, the police have
registered the case and taken up the investigation. At this
juncture, when the case was registered in Crime
No.90/2012 for the above said offences, the petitioner
has approached this Court. On 04.06.2013, this Court has
granted an order of stay of further proceedings, as such
the investigation should not have been proceeded with.
6
5. The two important legal points raised by the
learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court are
that,
(i) without any order by the District
Verification Committee there cannot be
launching of any criminal prosecution
under Rule 7-A of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and
Other Backward Classes (Reservation of
Appointments, Etc.) (Amendment) Rules,
1993 (for short “the Rules”).
(ii) It is contended that though the City
Corporation Gulbarga, has issued a circular
or notification dated 21.08.1989, it is an
omnibus circular and the said circular has
been considered by this Court in the earlier
writ petition filed by several Beda Jangama,
Budga Jangama and Mala Jangama, Samaja
Samstha, represented by its President in
7
Writ Petition No.18012/1989 with
connected matters, wherein this Court has
categorically ruled that, irrespective of any
circulars or any orders passed by any
authorities, the committee has to be
constituted and the committee has to verify
the caste certificate and thereafter only the
criminal proceedings, if necessary, to be
launched.
6. The learned High Court Government Pleader
contended that the Government has also issued a circular
in No.47/S.A.D/5/Bangalore dated 30.06.2007 stating
that prior to 1993, if any caste certificate were obtained
and subsequently if any dispute arises with regard to the
caste certificate, then District Caste Verification
Committee has no jurisdiction to decide the same.
However, the authority who have actually issued that
certificates have got power to decide the validity of the
8
certificate. Therefore, he contends that, in the year 1989
vide order dated 21.08.1989, the City Corporation of
Gulbarga, has issued a circular declaring all the caste
certificate issued by it, were cancelled and particularly this
petitioner has obtained the caste certificate in the year
1986. The said certificate is also covered under the
notification or the circular dated 21.08.1989. Therefore,
the police investigated the matter and launched the
prosecution as if there was no need of any verdict by the
District Caste Verification Committee.
7. In view of the above said submissions, now
let me consider what exactly Rule 7-A of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Classes (Reservation of Appointments, Etc.)
(Amendment) Rules, 1993 says. Prior to that, Rule 4 of
9
the Rules also play an important role in this case. Rule 4
of the Rules says that;
4. Caste Verification Committee . – (1) There shall be
a committee called the Caste Verification Committee for
each district to verify the caste certificate issued in respect
of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes. The committee shall consist of the
following members namely:-
(1) The Deputy Commissioner of the District who
shall be the Chairman;
(2) The Deputy Secretary (Administration) of the
Zilla Panchayat;
(3) The Tahsildar of Taluk;
(4) The District Social Welfare Officer who shall be
the Member Secretary.
8. Rule 7 imposes the responsibility on the
committee, which says as follows;
“7. Issue of Validity Certificate. – (1) After getting a
report on a reference made under Rule 6-A, the Caste
10
Verification Committee and the Caste and Income
Verification Committee shall hold an enquiry after
giving opportunity to the parties concerned.
(2) The Committee may examine school
records, birth registration certificate if any, and such
other relevant materials and may also examine any
other person who has the knowledge of the community
of the applicant;
Provided that in case of an applicant who
belongs to the Scheduled Tribes, the Committee may
also examine the anthropological and ethnological
traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death
ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies and such
other matters.
(3) If on such enquiry the Committee finds that
the applicants claim is genuine it may issue the
certificate sought for, in Form I-A, but where the
committee finds that the applicant obtained the Caste
Certificate or Income and Caste Certificate by making
a false representation, it shall pass an order rejecting
the application indicating the reasons therefor for such
11
refusal. An order under this sub-rule shall be passed
within one month from the date of receipt of the
application.
(4) Where the Committee even after the enquiry
referred to in sub-rules (2) and (3) finds that the claim
is doubtful, and is not in a position to come to a
conclusion it shall refer the matter to the Directorate of
Civil Rights Enforcement for detailed investigation
and report. On receipt of the report from the
Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement, the
Committee shall dispose off the case on merit, after
holding such enquiry as it deems fit and after giving
the applicant an opportunity of being heard. An order
under this sub-rule shall be made within one month
from the date of receipt of the application.
(5) Any person aggrieved by an order of the
Caste Verification Committee or Caste and Income
Verification Committee may appeal to the Divisional
Commissioner. The Divisional Commissioner shall
after giving an opportunity of being heard to both the
12
parties pass such order as he deems fit within forty-five
days from the date of filing of such appeal”.
Rule 7-A of the said Rules, in my opinion is dependant
upon the proceedings contemplated under 7 of the Rules.
Rule 7-A says that.
“7-A. Prosecution for obtaining false caste
certificate. – (1) The Caste Verification Committee or
the Caste and Income Verification Committee, as the
case may be and the Divisional Commissioner, shall
send a copy of the order rejecting claim of the applicant
for grant of Validity Certificate or, as the case may be,
a copy of the order in appeal rejecting such claim, to
the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement.
(2) The Directorate of Civil Rights
Enforcement shall take steps to prosecute such
claimant who has obtained a false Caste Certificate”.
9. On plain reading of the above said provision
under Rule 7 and 7-A of the Rules it clearly disclose that
13
only after the enquiry under Rule 7 of the Rules by the
competent District Caste Verification Committee, the
said committee or the appellate authority have to send
their report to the Directorate of Civil Rights
Enforcement and thereafter only, the Directorate of Civil
Rights Enforcement shall take steps to prosecute the
persons who falsely obtained the certificate. Therefore,
the above said provision clearly disclose that preliminary
enquiry is contemplated under Rule 7 of the Rules by the
District Caste Verification Committee before which no
prosecution is contemplated under Rule 7-A of the Rules.
In this particular case, it is clear that the Dy.SP.,
Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement, Gulbarga has
registered the case without there being any order passed
after enquiry under Rule 7 by the District Caste
Verification Committee and there is no material in the
14
FIR itself that Caste Verification Committee or the
appellate authority passed any order and have sent any
copy of the order by rejecting the claim or declaring that
Caste Certificate of the petitioner is false or fake, and it
requires prosecution and Directorate is empowered to
prosecute such person. Therefore, without there being
any direction from the District Caste Verification
Committee independently, the Directorate of Civil Rights
Enforcement has no jurisdiction to directly investigate
into the matter and file any charge sheet to the Court
when the procedure as contemplated under the Rules are
not followed.
10. Now let me come to other important aspect.
According to the respondents, the Caste Verification
Committee has already disposed off the application filed
by the petitioner, on her request that she has already
15
voluntarily resigned the job, therefore, the matter has to
be closed. It goes without saying that the District Caste
Verification Committee has not at all followed the
procedure contemplated under Rule 7 in order to
ascertain as to whether the certificate obtained by the
petitioner was a false, fake or forged certificate or it is not
an authenticated document issued by the competent
authority and only for the purpose of getting a job, she
has manipulated the said document and produced before
the competent authority. For that, under Rule 7 an
elaborate procedure is contemplated for the purpose of
ascertaining as to the genuinity of such document.
Particularly, the said provision empowers the committee
to ascertain whether such person belongs to the said caste
or not. For that enquiry contemplated clearly discloses
that the committee can consider any other material and
16
may also examine any person and also examine the
anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals,
customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of
burial of dead bodies and such other matters. These
provisions clearly indicate that a person who actually
belonging to the said community, merely because of some
discrepancy in the certificate should not be unnecessarily
harassed and that is the object of the above said rule. In
my opinion, those procedures should be very strictly
complied with. The Deputy Commissioner being the
Chairman of the said Committee could not have closed
the application merely because the said lady resigned the
job or made an application for closing the proceedings. It
is mere closure of the said proceedings without
ascertaining and adjudicating the point as to whether the
said certificate is genuine one or fake or fabricated
17
document. Irrespective claim of the petitioner, the
committee and the appellate authorities are duty bound to
adjudicate the case when it is called in question, under
Rule 7 of the said Rules, when statute under Rule 7-A
further contemplates that, if any offence being committed
with reference to the said certificate then the person is
liable for prosecution. Therefore, irrespective of
intention of the parties, it is incumbent upon the
committee to decide as to whether such document is
genuine or fake or it is a forged document. If such
proceedings have not been concluded with an
adjudicatory report and merely on the basis of closing of
the application, no authority can infer that the said
document is a false or fake document, to invoke the
provisions under the Rule 7-A of the Rules. In this case,
when such an adjudicatory order is not passed by the
18
District Committee, the Directorate of Civil Rights
Enforcement has no jurisdiction to invoke Rule 7-A of
the said rules to prosecute the petitioner. Therefore, in
my opinion, initiation of such criminal proceedings is
premature one.
11. Now coming to the other important aspects
with regard to the circular issued by the Government on
30.06.2007 and also notification or circular issued by the
Corporation City of Gulbarga dated 21.08.1989, this
particular aspect is no more res-integra by virtue of the
decision of this Court in W.P.No.18012/1989 and
connected matters, dated 27.01.1995, wherein the said
notification dated 21.08.1989 was called in question.
Though this petitioner was not a specific party to the said
proceedings but a Samstha constituted for the welfare of
the Mala Jangam, Beda Jangam, Budga Jangam Samaja
19
Samstha have filed petition before the Court in the said
case. In the said case, similar set of facts were involved.
The Court at paragraph-2 has culled out the categories of
cases pending before the High Court which are as
follows:
“(i) Cases where caste certificates had been
issued, but subsequently withdrawn, cancelled or
suspended;
(ii) Application for caste certificates have been
rejected on the basis of the impugned circulars, but
subsequently caste certificates have been issued
pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court
and in some cases, interim orders have not been
granted.
(iii) Applications for issue of caste certificates
are still pending.
20
(iv) Prosecution has been launched on the basis
of the C.O.D. reports that caste certificates have been
obtained by playing fraud.”
12. So far as this case is concerned, item Nos.1
and 4 are applicable. In this case also caste certificate had
been issued by the Corporation City Gulbarga and
subsequently, on 21.08.1989, the same has been cancelled
in an omnibus circular issued by it. In fact, the said
Circular dated 21.08.1989 issued by the Corporation City
Gulbarga was the subject matter in the High Court in the
above said writ petitions. After analyzing the circular
issued by the Government from time to time and also the
notification issued by the different authorities, the Court
has ultimately held in the following manner:
“The Supreme Court having examined the
question of recognizing the caste status of a person and
prescribed the procedure thereto, the entire matter will
21
have to be re-examined in that light. Therefore, the
learned Advocate General submits the State will
constitute a Committee as contemplated in the said
decision and that Committee will be free to decide the
same and unhampered by any of the circulars issued by
the Government.
In view of this undertaking given, it is not
necessary to quash the impugned circulars. All that
needs to be noticed is, the Committee to be constituted
as directed by the Supreme Court shall not be bound
by any of the circulars. The learned Advocate General
also submits that such Committee will be constituted
within a period of six weeks from today. Recording
his submission, these petitions will have to be disposed
of. Whatever may have been the stage of proceedings,
whether the certificates have been issued, cancelled,
suspended or whether any certificates have been issued
pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court or
applications for issue of caste certificates are pending
before the authorities or cases where prosecution has
22
been launched on the basis of the C.O.D. reports shall
all be governed by this order and any interim order
granted by this Court shall enure to the benefit of the
petitioners during the pendency of the proceedings before
the concerned Committee. Notwithstanding the
endorsement given to the petitioners, the matter shall
be reconsidered by the said Committee irrespective of
the circulars issued by the Government. Similarly
where applications have not been disposed off the
concerned officers shall bear in mind the said decision
of the Supreme Court and dispose off the applications
without reference to any of the circulars. The
authorities concerned have got to dispose of the matters
as expeditiously as possible. Depending upon the
outcome of the proceedings before the authorities,
further steps have to be taken including continuation of
prosecutions.”
13. The above said observation made by this
Court abundantly makes it clear that after constitution of
the committee by the government, there cannot be any
23
circulars be issued empowering any parallel authorities
either to cancel the certificate, suspend the certificate or
to pass any orders with regard to the genuinety of such
certificates. Therefore, the argument of the learned High
Court Government Pleader that the Government has
issued notification dated 30.06.2007 stating that caste
certificates issued prior to 1993 can be cancelled by the
same authorities holds no water. The Government has
absolutely no power to issue such circular in utter
disregard to the decision rendered by this Court.
Perhaps, having come to know of this aspect, the
government vide its further Notification No.¸ÀPÀE 44
J¸ïJr 2008 É̈AUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ dated 06.05.2009 has cancelled the
earlier notification dated 30.06.2007.
24
14. Therefore, looking from the above said facts
and circumstances, so far as this case is concerned, as I
have already narrated that Caste Verification Committee
has not at all decided the genuinety, falsity, fakeness or
forgery of the caste certificate pertaining to the petitioner.
The complaint itself shows that the Deputy
Commissioner-cum-President of the Committee has
simply closed the case of the petitioner. Therefore, it is
incumbent upon the Directorate of Civil Rights
Enforcement to initiate the proceedings as per Rule 7-A
of the Rules only after getting the report from the District
Caste Verification Committee. Respondent No.2 is at
liberty to initiate the proceedings if necessary, only after
any report is received by him under Rule 7 of the Rules.
15. With these observations, I am of the opinion
that the case registered against the petitioner in Crime
25
No.90/2012 for the above said offences does not survive
and the same deserves to be quashed. However, as I have
said, quashment of the present proceedings would not
obstruct the said authorities in initiating the proceedings
in accordance with law after following the procedure
contemplated under Rule 7 and 7-A of the Rules.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently,
all further proceedings in Crime No.90/2012 of
Brahmapur Police Station, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-JUDGE
MSR/NB
Recommended