Smt. Tara. T. M vs State Of Karnataka
2024 Latest Caselaw 18495 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Tara. T. M vs State Of Karnataka on 25 July, 2024

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                                    -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:29329
                                                          CRL.A No. 1206 of 2024




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

                                               BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1206 OF 2024
                      BETWEEN:

                            SMT. TARA. T. M.
                            D/O. MAHENDRA
                            AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
                            R/AT MARIYANNA TEMPLE
                            OPP. S.S. TEMPLE ROAD
                            VINIBHANAGARA
                            TUMAKURU.
                                                                    ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI YABESH M, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            TUMKUR TOWN POLICE STATION
                            TUMKUR, KARNATAKA,
                            REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                            HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by         BENGALURU-560 001.
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH        2.  MANJULA. P. N. (PSI)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                 DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
                          TUMAKUR UNIT, 4TH CROSS,
                          N. MALLAPPA ROAD,
                          SIRA GATE,
                          TUMAKURU-572 102.
                                                             ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI.RANGASWAMY R. HCGP FOR R-1
                          SRI. C. JAGADISH, ADOVATE FOR R-2)

                           THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
                      PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.05.2024
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC:29329
                                   CRL.A No. 1206 of 2024




PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.691/2024 BY THE III ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT    AND    SESSIONS    JUDGE,     TUMAKURU     IN
CR.NO.173/2024 AND GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HER ARREST FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 109, 196,
197, 198, 199 AND 420 OF IPC, SEC. 3(1)(q) OF SC/ST (POA)
ACT AND SEC. 5-A AND 5(b) OF KARNATAKA SC/ST AND
OTHER BACKWARD CLASES (RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENT
etc) RULES AT TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU
TOWN CIRCLE, TUMAKURU, KARNATAKA.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DICTATING JUDGMENT,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:   HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


                   ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)

This appeal is filed by appellant -accused No.1

praying to set aside the order 06.05.2024 passed in

Crl.Misc.No.691/2024 by the III Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Tumkuru, whereunder the anticipatory

bail petition of this appellant-accused No.1 sought in

respect of Crime No.173/2024 of Tumakuru Town Police

Station for offences punishable under Sections 109, 196,

197, 198, 199 and 420 of Indian Penal Code (herein after

referred as 'IPC' for brevity), Section 3(1)(q) of the

Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred as 'SC and ST

Act' for brevity) and Section 5(A) and 5(b) of the

Karnataka SC/ST and other Backwards Classes

(Reservation of Appointment, Etc) Rules, 1990 came to be

rejected.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant -

accused No.1, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1 -State.

3. The Caste Verification Committee, Tumakuru

passed an order that appellant -accused No.1 in collusion

with the other accused have secured a fake caste

certificate to the effect that she belongs to Adi Karnataka

caste though in reality she belonged to Goudar caste

which is not a scheduled caste. The Caste Verification

Committee cancelled the caste certificate issued in favour

of appellant -accused No.1. Further, respondent No.2 was

directed to file a complaint against the appellant -accused

No.1 for grant of false caste certificate. On that basis

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

complainant has been filed and case came to be

registered. The appellant -accused No.1 apprehending

her arrest filed anticipatory bail petition. The Special

Court rejected the said bail petition on the ground that

there is bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act bars

granting anticipatory bail in cases where offence alleged

prima facie attracts the provisions of SC and ST Act and

the appellant -accused No.1 is required for custodial

interrogation.

4. It was contended that the appellant -accused

No.1's parents have entered the caste in the records of

this appellant -accused No.1 and at that time appellant -

accused No.1 was minor and she was not aware of the

said aspect. On coming to know that she belongs to

schedule caste, she filed suit in O.S.No.299/2016 on the

file of the Principle Civil Judge and JMFC-I, Tumakuru to

declare her caste as Tamil Goudar instead of Schedule

Caste and sought directions to correct her caste in records

maintained by concerned Authority. The said suit came to

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

be dismissed on the ground of maintainability. The

appellant -accused No.1 has been selected under category

of GM-Women and not under schedule caste category.

The appellant -accused No.1 has not availed any benefit

pertaining to person belonging to schedule caste. The

appellant -accused No.1 has not given any false or

frivolous information to public servant to attract offence

under Section 3(1)(q) of the SC and ST Act and therefore,

bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act is not attracted.

Even the appellant -accused No.1 has filed application on

05.01.2015 to DG and HRD(T), Shakti Nagar, Raichuru to

consider her appointment in continue her service as

general merit. He contends that therefore, there is no

intention on the part of the appellant -accused No.1 to

deprive benefits to any of the person belongs to schedule

caste. The appellant -accused No.1 is ready to cooperate

with police in investigation. The appellant -accused No.1

is women. With this, he prays to allow the appeal and

grant anticipatory bail to the appellant -accused No.1.

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

5. Section 3(1)(q) of the SC and ST Act applies to

any person who gives 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 schedule caste or a schedule tribe. The caste of

the appellant -accused No.1 has been entered by her

parents in the records and at that time she was minor. The

appellant -accused No.1 has not given any false and

frivolous information to any public servant. Therefore, at

this stage it cannot be said that offence punishable under

Section 3(1)(q) of the SC and ST Act is attracted and

invoke bar under Section 18 of ST And ST Act. The trial

Court without considering all these aspects has rejected

anticipatory bail petition by the impugned order which

requires interference by this Court. The offences alleged

against the appellant -accused No.1 are not punishable

with death or imprisonment for life.

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

6. The appellant -accused No.1 has made out

grounds for setting aside the impugned order and grant of

anticipatory bail.

7. In the result, the following

ORDER

i) The appeal is allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 06.05.2024 passed

in Crl.Misc.No.691/2024 by the III Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru is set

aside.

iii) The anticipatory bail petition of the appellant-

accused No.1 stands allowed and she is ordered

to be released on bail in the event of her arrest

in Crime No. 173/2024 of Tumakuru Town

Police Station subject to the following

conditions;

a) The appellant -accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh

NC: 2024:KHC:29329

only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer.

b) The appellant -accused No.1 shall voluntarily appear before the Investigation Office within 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and execute the personal bond and furnish surety.

c) The appellant -accused No.1 shall cooperate with the Police in the investigation.

d) The appellant -accused No.1 shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.

Sd/-

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

DSP