IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1534/2019 BETWEEN:
D.S.Ramaswamy, S/o.Shivamadanayhaka, Aged about 28 years, Residing at Dinka Village, Chinakurali Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk, Mandya District, Pin Code No.571 434. ... Petitioner (By Sri.Raju.C.N, Adv.,) AND:
State of Pandavapura Police, Mandya, Represented by SPP, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, Pin Code No-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri.M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP; Notice served on complainant) This Criminal Petition is filed u/s.438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.421/2018 of Pandavapura P.S., Mandya District for the offence p/u/s 198, 420 of IPC and Sec.3(1)(ix) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.421/2018 of Pandavapura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 198 and 420 of IPC and Section 3(1)(ix) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. Since the complainant himself is the PSI and has already been notified, he is represented by the learned High Court Government Pleader.
3. Gist of the complaint is that the petitioner/accused belongs to Besta community (caste), by giving wrong information to the Tahsildar stating that he belongs to Nayaka caste, which comes under the Scheduled Tribes, has obtained a false Caste Certificate and on the basis of the said Caste Certificate, he was selected as a Police Constable under the Scheduled Tribes category. During verification, it was found that the petitioner/accused belongs to Besta caste and not Nayaka caste as claimed by the petitioner. After an enquiry, it was established that in order to obtain the job, the petitioner/accused has created a false Caste Certificate and got issued the same through the Tahsildar. It is further stated that based on the said report, the Tahsildar cancelled the caste certificate issued to the petitioner/accused. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner that as per the order of the Court in O.S. No.116/2007, the Deputy Commissioner of Mandya District has issued the direction to the Tahsildar to enquire into the petitioner’s case. As per the said direction, the Tahsildar has made an enquiry and thereafter, he has issued the Caste Certificate. The said Caste Certificate has been issued by order of the Court but not by means of any fraud played by the petitioner/accused. It is further submitted that he got selected as a Police Constable under the general category and has not claimed any categories reserved for the said post. Under such circumstance, the complaint itself is not in accordance with law. Further it is submitted that he has neither committed fraud nor cheated the Tahsildar or any other Authorities. Under the wrong impression, the said complaint was filed. He further submitted that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and he is ready to abide by the conditions imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer surety. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused has given the wrong information and has obtained the false Caste Certificate under the Scheduled Tribes Category and by misusing the same, he got appointed as a Police Constable. During the course of verification, it has been noticed that a criminal case also been registered as per the direction of the Deputy Commissioner. He further submitted that though he belongs to Besta Caste, has claimed the Caste as Nayaka. There is ample material to connect the petitioner/accused to the alleged crime. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint and other material, in indicates that it is the contention of the complainant, though the petitioner/accused belongs to Besta Community, has obtained a fabricated certificate from the Tahsildar by claiming that the petitioner belongs to Nayaka caste.
8. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the order of the Court and direction issued by the Deputy Commissioner, the Tahsildar has issued the Caste Certificate i.e., the matter which has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. It is further submitted that the said Caste Certificate, which was issued has been cancelled in due process of law. But it is the submission of the learned counsel that the said aspect has also been challenged before the Court. Under the said facts and circumstance, till the disposal of the case, it cannot be held that whether the accused has played any fraud to obtain the Caste Certificate? When the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and when the matter is still under investigation, under such circumstance, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
9. In that light, petition is allowed and the petitioner/accused is enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.421/2018 of Pandavapura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 198 and 420 of IPC and Section 3(1)(ix) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 subject to the following conditions:
1. The petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission 5. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the charge sheet is filed.
6. He shall co-operate during the course of investigation.
VBS Sd/- JUDGE