Karnataka High Court
Sri J S Siddalingaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 June, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
CRL.A No. 898 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 931 of 2024
CRL.A No. 894 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 898 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 931 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 894 OF 2024
IN CRL.A.No.898/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRI J S SIDDALINGAIAH
S/O LATE SIDDARAMIAH
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
RETD. VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT
JANAKADEVANAHLLI
KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 216.
Digitally signed by ...APPELLANT
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH (BY SRI R P SOMASHEKARAIAH, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE
TUMAKURU - 572 101.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
CRL.A No. 898 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 931 of 2024
CRL.A No. 894 of 2024
2. MANJULA P N., PSI
D/O NOT KNOW
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
ENFORCEMENT CELL
4TH CROSS, N. MALLAPPA ROAD
SIRA GATE, TUMAKURU - 572 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R1
SRI C JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2- V.C)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANT
IN RESPECT OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY RESPONDENT
No.2 BEFORE THE TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE, TUMAKURU IN
CR.No.173/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 109,
196, 197, 198, 199, 420 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1)(q) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT AND SECTION 5(A), 5(B) OF KARNATAKA
SC/ST AND OTHER BC (RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENT ACT)
ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
COURT, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU.
IN CRL.A.No.931/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRI ASHOBALAIAH B
S/O A BHOGANARASIMHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
WORKING AS TAHASILDAR
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMKURU DISTRICT
RESIDING AT:JAGANNATHAPURA
KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 103.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NAIK VENKATRAMAN NAGAPPA, ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
CRL.A No. 898 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 931 of 2024
CRL.A No. 894 of 2024
AND:
1. THE STATE BY TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE
TUMAKURU
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SMT. MANJULA P N
HUSBAND NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
WORKING AS POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS-
ENFORCEMENT, TUMAKURU UNIT
4TH CROSS, TUMAKURU - 572 103.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R1
SRI C JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 -V.C)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE
APPELLANT AND FURTHER DIRECT THE 1ST RESPONDENT
POLICE/TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE, TUMAKURU, TO RELEASE
HIM IN THE EVENT OF ARRST IN CR.No.173/2024, FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 109, 109, 196, 197, 198, 199, 420 OF IPC AND
ETC.,
IN CRL.A No.894/2024:
BETWEEN:
MR JAYAPRAKASH NARAYAN
S/O VENKATESHULU
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
RAJASVA INSPECTORS
KASABA HOBLI
TUMAKURU - 572 102.
R/AT SRI GANDHA, 6TH CROSS
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
CRL.A No. 898 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 931 of 2024
CRL.A No. 894 of 2024
DEVARJA ARAS MAIN ROAD
SARASWATHIPURAM, MARALUR
TUMKURU - 572 105.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI PRAVEEN C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TUMAKURU TOWN P.S,
TUMKURU
REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. MANJULA P N PSI
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT
TUMKUR UNIT, 4TH CROSS
N MALLAPPA ROAD
SIRA GATE
TUMKURU - 572 102.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED:06.05.2024 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.654/2024 BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AT
TUMKURU AND ETC.,
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
praying to set aside the order dated 06.05.2024 passed in
Crl.Misc.No. 686/2024 by the III Additional District and
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
Sessions Judge, Tumakuru; Crl.A. No. 931/2024 is filed by
accused No. 2 praying to set aside the order dated
06.05.2024 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 651/2024 by the III
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru and
Crl.A. No. 894/2024 is filed by accused No. 3 praying to
set aside the order dated 06.05.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.
No. 654/2024 by the III Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Tumakuru.
2. All these three appeals are filed by the
appellants, namely, accused Nos. 2 to 4 seeking
anticipatory bail in crime No. 173/2024 of Tumakuru town
Police Station registered for offence punishable under
Sections 109, 196, 197, 198, 199, 420 of IPC and Section
3(1)(q) of the SC ST (POA) Act and Section 5(A) and 5(B)
of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and
other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment etc.)
Act, 1990 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to
as Act, 1990'). Their petitions came to be rejected by the
impugned orders.
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants in
all the three appeals and learned HCGP for respondent No.
1 - State and Sri. C. Jagadish, learned counsel for
respondent No. 2.
4. The Caste Verification Committee, Tumakuru
passed an order that accused No. 1 in collusion with the
appellants had secured a fake caste certificate to the effect
that she belongs to Adi Karnataka caste though in reality
she belonged to Gounder caste which is not a scheduled
caste. The Caste Verification Committee cancelled the
caste certificate issued in favour of accused No.1. Further,
respondent No.2 was directed to file a complaint against
the appellants and accused No.1 for grant of false caste
certificate. On that basis he filed a complaint and case
came to be registered.
5. The appellants, apprehending their arrest in
the said case, filed anticipatory bail petitions before the
Special Court. The Special Court rejected their bail
petitions on the ground that Section 18 of the SC ST (POA)
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
Act bars granting anticipatory bail in cases where offence
alleged prima facie attracts the provisions of SC ST (POA)
Act and appellants are required for custodial interrogation.
6. It was contended that the appellants had not
followed the due procedure as prescribed under Rule 3 of
the Rules 1990 and therefore, there was prima facie case
against them and Section 18 of the SC ST (POA) Act was
applicable.
7. The complaint was filed alleging commission of
offence under Section 3(1)(q) of the SC ST (POA) Act and
Section 5 (A) and (B) of the Act 1990. Section 3(1)(q) of
the SC ST (POA) 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.
8. Section 5-B of the Act 1990 deals with penalty
for issuing a false caste certificate or income and caste
certificate which reads as follows:
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
"5(b). Penalty for issuing a false Caste
Certificate of Income and Caste Certificate.-
If the Tahsildar intentionally issues a false Caste
Certificate or Income and Caste Certificate, he
shall on conviction, be punishable with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less
than six months but which may extend upto two
years and with fine which shall not be less than
one thousand rupees but which may extend to
five thousand rupees:
Provided that the Court may, for adequate
and special reasons to be recorded, impose a
sentence of imprisonment for a lesser term or
lesser fine."
9. To attract the liability under the above provision
prima facie there should be intentional issue of false caste
certificate or income and caste certificate.
10. In the case on hand the appellants are not
beneficiaries of the caste certificate in question. It was
accused No. 1 who was the beneficiary. The records
produced by the appellants show that accused No. 1
produced the caste certificate issued in her favour by the
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
Tahsildar. They also conducted local enquiry and issued
the caste certificate. The Civil Rights Enforcement
Directorate had not filed any complaint against those
Tahsildars who issued caste certificate in the year 2003
and thereafter. The records produced show that the
appellants relied on the caste certificate issued by the very
same department in the year 2003 and school certificates
produced by accused No. 1. Therefore, it cannot be said
that the appellants were not diligent or they intentionally
issued the false certificate. As certificate of 2003 was not
questioned, prima facie case of intentional issue of the
caste certificate by the appellants was not made out.
Under such circumstances and in view of the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Prithvi Raj Chouhan
Vs. Union of India reported in 2020 (4) SCC 727, Section
18 and 18-A of the SC/ST (POA) Act are not attracted
against the appellants.
11. The offence alleged are not punishable with
either death or imprisonment for life. Appellants have
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
permanent roots in the society. The alleged false caste
certificate/documents were in the custody of respondent
No. 2. Therefore, there is no scope for the appellants to
tamper them. Under these circumstances it is held that the
Special Court was not justified in rejecting the anticipatory
bail petitions filed by the appellants - accused Nos.2 to 4.
Therefore, the impugned orders passed by the Special
Court rejecting the anticipatory bail petitions of the
appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 requires to be set aside
and appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 are entitled for grant
of anticipatory bail.
12. In the result, the following;
ORDER
Crl. A. Nos. 898/2024, 931/2024 and 894/2024 are
allowed. The impugned orders dated 06.05.2004 passed in
Crl. Misc. Nos. 686/2024, 651/2024 and 654/2024 by the
III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, are
set aside. The appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 are ordered
to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in crime
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:19277
No. 173/2024 of Tumakuru town Police Station subject to
the following conditions:
I. The appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh Only ) each with one surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
II. The appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 shall voluntarily
appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and
execute the personal bond and furnish surety.
III. The appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 shall cooperate with
the Police in the investigation.
IV. The appellants - accused Nos. 2 to 4 shall not tamper the
prosecution witnesses.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LRS
