"1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all
reasonable doubts that, on 10.8.1992 at Athani, the
accused corruptly used affidavit and other false
information as true knowing that information and
affidavit are false and obtained caste certificate from
Tahasildar Office, Athani and thereby committed an
offence punishable under section 196 and 198 of IPC?
4. And passed judgment, answering points no.1 and 2
in negative, point no.3 acquitting petitioner of all offences.
5. Based on contentions, following points were framed
2. What order?"
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
6. On consideration, it answered point no.1 in
affirmative and point no.2 by allowing appeal, setting aside
judgment passed in C.C.no.486/2005 and convicting petitioner
for offences punishable under Sections 196, 198 and 420 of IPC
and after hearing petitioner, imposed sentence of simple
imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default
to undergo simple imprisonment for further period of three
months, for each of offences and ordering them to run
concurrently.
7. It was submitted acquittal by trial Court was on
detailed examination of entire material on record and by
assigning appropriate reasons. However, without proper re-
appreciation, appeal was allowed.
8. It was submitted, caste certificate was allegedly
obtained on 26.08.1992, whereas complaint was lodged a
decade later on 14.12.2002, without proper explanation for
enormous delay. Same ex-facie indicated that it was only to
harass petitioner. It was submitted, except official witnesses all
independent witnesses had turned hostile. Taking note of same,
trial Court had granted benefit of doubt to petitioner.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
9. It was further submitted, prosecution case
depended on cancellation of caste certificate issued to
petitioner as per order at Ex.P47. It was submitted, Appellate
Court had reversed finding of trial Court on observation that
petitioner had not challenged order at Ex.P47. It was
submitted, PW.7, then District Social Welfare Officer, Belagavi
who was acting Member Secretary of District Caste Verification
Committee ('DCVC' for short) admitted that he had not issued
any notice to petitioner. Thus, petitioner had no knowledge for
proceedings before DCVC or order passed therein.
Consequently, there was procedural irregularity in process of
cancellation. Under such circumstances, prosecution could not
rely merely on order of cancellation to conclude that petitioner
had corruptly used caste certificate to obtain benefit, meant for
SC/STs.
10. It was also submitted, CW.1 - complainant was not
examined during trial on account of his death. PW.6, who had
worked as In-Charge Social Welfare Officer at Athani between
1996 and 2001, deposed that as per orders of DCVC, he visited
Junjurwad on 06.09.2001 with regard to caste of petitioner,
recorded statements of several persons and submitted Ex.P5
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
report. But in cross-examination, he admitted that he had not
visited petitioner's house or recorded statements of any of his
family members or relatives. He also admitted that no records
were verified. Said admission would take away basis of Ex.P.47
order. Likewise, even PW-8 who had worked as Tahsildar,
Athani during 12.03.2004 to 18.05.2005 admitted that he had
not made any local inspection and had relied upon report of
Deputy Tahsildar. Therefore, there was no basis for issuing
Ex.P6 letter to CW.1.
11. It was submitted PW.9 admitted that petitioner had
not approached him for getting caste certificate. Therefore,
prosecution cannot rely upon deposition of PW.9 to substantiate
any irregularity in issuance of Ex.P.46 - caste certificate.
Attention was drawn to deposition of PW.15 Manager of SC/ST
Corporation, that after receipt of petitioner's application, only
after enquiry and obtaining report from Tahsildar, loan was
granted to petitioner. It was submitted, such verification would
give rise to serious doubt about prosecution allegation that
petitioner does not belong to 'Hindu Holer' caste.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
12. It was submitted PW.16 had stated that on
instruction of PW.33, he had visited Junjurwad and recorded
statement of witnesses. But in cross-examination, he admitted
that he had only visited village chavadi and enquired with two
persons present there and that he had not enquired with any
relatives or neighbours. PW.21 - Village Accountant of
Junjurwad between 1991 and 1992 stated that he along with
Revenue Inspector made local inspection and submitted report
that petitioner belongs to 'Hindu Holer' caste. Thus, order of
acquittal by trial Court was based on appreciation of above
material aspects. It was submitted, Appellate Court relied on
deposition of PWs-13 and 31 residents of Junjurwad. It was
contended that their deposition was unreliable as they were
treated as hostile by APP.
13. It was submitted, genesis of petitioner's prosecution
was letter written by President of Dr.Ambedkar Yuvak Mandal,
Junjurwad on 22.08.1996 that based on false caste certificate
loan was obtained and land purchased by cheating Corporation.
Based on same and in order to satiate government
apprehensions, petitioner was hurriedly implicated. It was
submitted Ex.P45 alleged application filed with SC/ST
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
Corporation for obtaining loan was by Parish s/o Annappa
Kamble and not in name of petitioner i.e., Doddawwa Kamble.
Therefore, very basis for contention of prosecution that
petitioner had corruptly used false caste certificate would be
rendered without basis. It was further submitted, in her
statement recorded under Section 313 of CrPC, she stated that
she had not filed any application and obtained any benefit from
Government.
14. It was lastly submitted, Hon'ble Supreme Court in
case of Vimalakka Ramappa Koli @ Talwar v. The State of
Karnataka reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3364, in similar
set of facts had allowed appeal and set-aside conviction and
acquitted accused. Relying on said ratio, learned counsel
sought for allowing revision.
15. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for
respondent - State sought to oppose petition. It was submitted
though petitioner belonged to Hindu Jain caste, he had
obtained false certificate as 'Hindu Holer'. Immediately after
receipt of information, complaint was lodged and enquiry
conducted. During investigation, Investigating Officer collected
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
necessary material to establish offences and filed charge-sheet
for offences under Sections 196, 198 and 420 of IPC. It was
submitted, though evidence of witnesses supported prosecution
case, without appreciation, trial Court acquitted petitioner. But
Appellate Court on re-examination rightly convicted petitioner.
Though divergent, finding about petitioner obtaining false caste
certificate availing loan from funds reserved for persons
belonging to scheduled caste and tribes, and purchasing 2
acres of land was established and finding by Appellate Court in
this aspect was a finding of fact not amenable to interference in
revision. On said ground sought dismissal of petition.
16. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned
judgment/order and record.
17. From above, only point that would arise for
consideration is :
0"Whether judgment of conviction and
order of sentence passed by Appellate
Court calls for interference?
18. This revision petition is filed under Section 397 read
with Section 401 (1) of CrPC. On Hon'ble Supreme Court in
case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander, reported in
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
(2012) 9 SCC 460 has held scope for interference in revision
would be extremely limited normally only to questions of law
and not finding of fact.
19. But learned counsel for petitioner had sought to
substantiate case for interference by relying upon ratio in
Vimalakka Koli's case claiming similarity of facts. On perusal
it is noted that accused therein was prosecuted for offences
punishable under Sections 196, 198 and 420 of IPC alleging
that she had obtained false caste certificate as belonging to
'Hindu Holer' caste, applied for and obtained loan from SC/ST
Corporation, even though she belonged to 'Hindu Talawar'
caste and Committee had invalidated her caste certificate.
While trial Court acquitted, same was reversed in Appeal and
she was convicted, which was confirmed in revision. In appeal,
Hon'ble Supreme Court held in order to establish offence under
Section 198 of IPC, it would not suffice merely proving
obtaining of loan on basis of caste certificate which was later
cancelled. It was held corruptly using certificate was not
sufficient, but allegation that certificate was false to knowledge
of accused must be proved by prosecution. It was observed,
mere cancellation of caste certificate would not ipso facto
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
establish corrupt usage of caste certificate. It was also clarified
that cases where caste certificate of applicant was invalidated
on ground of failure to prove his caste would not fall within fold
of Section 198 of IPC. It held requirements of offence under
Section 420 were also similar.
20. In instant case, in her statement recorded under
Section 313 of CrPC, petitioner stated that she was innocent
and falsely implicated. She stated that about 20 years earlier,
one Shanmuk Kamble had taken her thumb
impression/signature and was responsible for this case. She
stated that she did not take any land from Govt.
21. In order to establish that petitioner obtained false
caste certificate stating that she belonged to Hindu Holer caste,
prosecution relied on Exs.P6 to P10, P23, P46 and P47. And to
substantiate that she obtained benefit of loan from SC/ST
Corporation and purchased land, it relies on Ex.P30 - loan
sanction order; Ex.P31 - sale deed; Ex.P34 - receipt; Ex.P35 -
loan agreement; Ex.P36 - mortgage deed; Ex.P38 - pronote;
Ex.P40 - representation; Ex.P45 - application filed with SC/ST
Corporation.
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
22. Prosecution examined thumb impression expert as
PW-32 and got marked his opinion about thumb impression of
petitioner as Ex.P49. But, documents referred for his opinion
included only application etc., for obtaining caste certificate
without such effort insofar as above mentioned loan
documents. Apart from above, as pointed out by learned
counsel for petitioner, name of applicant found on Ex.P45 -
loan application is not that of petitioner but that of Parish
Kamble. This would render chain of circumstances required to
be established beyond reasonable doubt to establish petitioner
guilty of offences alleged, incomplete.
23. It is seen, while passing impugned judgment,
Appellate Court has not taken note of above facts. And
proceeded on assumption that there was no dispute about
petitioner obtaining caste certificate - Ex.P46 and availing
benefit from SC/ST Corporation and on reasoning that
petitioner had failed to challenge Ex.P47 - order passed by
DCVC cancelling caste certificate issued to petitioner. In fact,
Appellate Court has not referred to Ex.P45 at all. Even insofar
as failure to challenge order at Annexure-P47, it is elicited from
PW-7 that petitioner was not served with notice of proceedings
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3816
before DCVC. Consequently, proceedings for cancellation of
caste certificate were behind back of petitioner.
24. Thus, conclusion of Appellate Court being in
ignorance of above material would be perverse. Therefore,
point for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence
following:
ORDER
a. Revision petition is allowed.
b. Impugned judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 21.01.2015 passed by VII
Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi at
Chikkodi in Crl.A.no.3/2014, is set aside.
c. Judgment dated 26.08.2013 passed by
Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Athani in
C.C.no.486/2005 is restored and accused is
acquitted of offences punishable under
Sections 196, 198 and 420 of IPC.
d. Bail/Surety bonds shall stand discharged.
SD/-
(RAVI V.HOSMANI)
JUDGE
RH:GRD:EM
CT:PA
