Sri Rangram Naik vs The Police Sub-Inspector on 10 September, 2009

P

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 10"" DAY or SEPTEMBER 2009f,

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH_]§_;:ADliT.O.:"  T E O

CRIMINAL PETIT1ON:;lJO,%{t~4;tj9w_Q9_Ll2.'  "    '
BETWEEN: O 1' E O'

Sri.Rangrarn Naik

S/o Puttanna Naik

Aged about 48 years

Occ: Joint Director ._ 

Karnataka Land Arm§r_Corpor.ation=. ' .  '    '
Resident of Mysore    I  ..PET'l'l"lONER

(By Sri.Praveen K'um;1'::' Rai1:je.,Ady';')_  '

AND:

1.. The Police Sub«Ens'p.ect_o1'v._:"*--. O
Town Police Station  ' . 
Charnaraj Nagar _ 

Tragglrqljpe VvSnb-Inspector
. 'Civil R1 glflts Enforcement Cell
 la Officei' Kuvempunagar

O' ._l\>lysr'e.«  = '

V . 3. Tlie Sufierintendent of Police

 Civi1"Rights Enforcement Cell
" Regional Office: Kuvempunagar

 vMy'§«0re. .. RESPONDENTS

  (ray Sri.R.S.Bhat, HCGP.)



1
IO
i

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to
quash the entire proceedings initiated 56/2009 dt.8.4.2009 on the file of
the Town Police Station, Chamarajnagar.

This Petition coming on for admission this day, the Co:irt"niad.e the
following: '   

ORDER

Petitioner has sought for quashinghiof the ..vp’1’oceedi:ngsVV»i,n'”Crirne T

No.56/2009 registered on 8.4.2009. _

2. Case i.s registered against _petitioVn@e’1. offence
punishable under Sections (1x)iatia”7 sub»~section
(1.) Clause (ii) of the Soheduleti Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, s_l9t§f3.ieVadviyitbasectionsiil~V96,…t§8, 199, 420 IPC.

3. petitioner subrnits that, as against the

correctness of’-thei caste e’ert*i.fie’ate, the matter had come up before this

__Court >iT§:”W:P.N0.5’37..iSZ2009: and this Court by order dated 25″‘ March

;i1eased*–..to set aside the order of the authority cancelling the

caste c:–ert1f1ciat’e.__of, the pC{1{1OI1€I’ and the matte!-(was remanded to the

Tahsildiar forhoiding fresh enquiry.

ii ‘Ci4.,,A1t is now submitted that, in pursuance of the order of rernand,

_”‘«theAAVff’ah’sildar after verifying the material and aiso making enquiry has

‘Vvalidated the caste certificate issued to the petitioner. He also submitted

that, as far as caste of the petitioner is concerned, there is no challenge by
any of the authority. Despite that, crime is registered against the

petitioner. Even the direction issued by this Court to i’nii’tiaip’eg:”‘the

proceedings against the petitioner was also

W.P.No.5376/2009. –

5. If there is any doubt as regard to the pirocvetE.u_re..

for verification of the caste C€1’tlflCa{V€;.,_”Bxl_1{ it is not V-.wa3{V’of”‘f1’ling ad”

complaint. In this regard, when the “certifiicatei is ‘valicivaited by the
Tahsildar and when the caste is no reason
to proceed against the p:etti.tion_e’r;’ are continued,
it would be only an ‘
In the circdmsitances.spitliridst: allowed. The proceedings in
Crime No.56/2009 Cionsequently, M.isc.Cr1.375.l/2009

di
Sd/-

JUDGE