Allowed

D v. Yashwanth Kumar v State by Sakalespura Town Police Station

Karnataka HC17 Apr 2021WP/3198/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition and I.A. seeking quashing of an FIR and charge sheet under the SC/ST (POA) Act. The Court found the complaint lacked ingredients for special offences, involving only a civil dispute over Bar Association election rights.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and I.A. No.1/2021 allowed; FIR in Crime No.155/2020 and charge sheet in C.C. No.383/2020 quashed.

D v Yashwanth Kumar Vs State by Sakalespura Town Police… — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

¶3

BEFORE:

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.3198/2021 [GM-RES]

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

D V YASHWANTH KUMAR ADVOCATE, S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT DEENAHALLY VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKLESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶8

JYOTHI ADVOCATE, W/O RAJKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR, VINOBHA ROAD, NEAR GAYATHRI THEATRE, SAKALESHPURA TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.

¶9

B PARAMESHWARA ADVOCATE, S/O BELUREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, LAKSHMIPURAM EXTENSION, SAKLESHPURA TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.

¶10

... PETITIONERS

¶11

[BY SRI. ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. SANDHYA.D., ADVOCATE]

¶12

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE BY SAKALESPURA TOWN POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶15

SMT K. P. KALPANA W/O L KEERTHI, S P ROAD, SAKLESHPURA TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.

¶16

… RESPONDENTS

¶17

[BY SRI. H.R. SHOWRI, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 15.03.2021]

¶18

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.PC, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT SAKALESHPURA TOWN P.S. IN CRIME NO. 155/2020, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 (1)(r), 3(1)(s), OF SC/ST(PA) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 2014, VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC, praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari by

¶22

¶23

quashing the FIR registered by the Respondent No.1, Sakleshpur Town Police in Crime No.155/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 3[1][r], 3[1][s] of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Amendment Ordinance, 2014 and pass any other appropriate writ or order or direction as deemed fit in the circumstances.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners in view of filing of the charge sheet also filed an application in I.A. No.1/2021 under Section 482 of Cr.PC praying this Court to quash the charge sheet filed by the respondent-Police in C.C. No.383/2020 in respect of Police Crime No.155/2020 and the same is orally opposed by the learned High Court Government Pleader.

¶25

Petitioners’ Counsel in his arguments vehemently contended that on perusal of the entire complaint which is annexed as Annexure-A discloses that the dispute is with regard to removal of the name of the complainant

¶26

¶27

in the voters’ list of the Bar Association. The offence under Sections 3[1][r] and 3[1][s] of the special enactment are invoked. The complaint does not disclose any ingredients of the offences which has been invoked against the petitioners herein. Petitioners’ Counsel also contends that on entire reading of the complaint except mentioning that she belongs to a particular community, but nothing is averred taking her caste name or abusing her. The only allegation is that she belongs to a particular community and her right has been curtailed by removing her name and when she questioned, they did not allow her to question the removal of her name from the voters list and not participating in the bar election.

¶28

Learned Counsel also contends that even during the course of investigation also, the Police have not investigated the matter properly and looking into the contents of the complaint and also statement of the

¶29

¶30

complainant, they have filed charge sheet and while filing the charge sheet also, invoked other offences under Sections 3[1][[L][a], 3[1][u] of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe [Prevention of Atrocities] Amendment Act, 2015. There is no any material before the Court to invoke the special enactment and Counsel would vehemently contend that it is nothing but abuse of the process and if this proceedings is continued against the petitioners who are Members of the Bar and Advocates who are practicing in the same Bar Association, it leads to miscarriage of justice and hence it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.PC and quash the charge sheet filed against the petitioners herein.

¶31

Learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that on perusal of the complaint averments, it discloses that the incident took place in the Bar Association and contents of the complaint though not

¶32

¶33

disclosed the particular offence of invoking Sections 3[1][r] and 3[1][s], specific allegation is made against the petitioners that they are coming in the way of exercising right of the complainant in the election and questioning the right of the Bar Association Member and the complainant who is also practicing Advocate in the same Bar Association. The Police have investigated the matter and filed charge sheet and it requires trial.

¶34

Having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and also learned High Court Government Pleader and though complainant had acknowledged the notice of this writ petition did not choose to appear or engage the Counsel.

¶35

A perusal of the complaint averments shows that there is no allegation to invoke sections 3[1][r] and 3[1][s] and nothing has been averred in the complaint that by taking caste name, they abused the complainant with an intention to humiliate her in the presence of

¶36

¶37

general public. Having read the complaint in its entirety, the only allegation is made that when she questioned removal of her name in the voters list to franchise her vote and to participate in the election of the Bar Association, the incident has taken place. Having read the complaint, it is clear that the dispute is in respect of the Bar Association and only reference was made in the complaint that she belongs to a particular community and when she questioned the same, her right has been curtailed. The Police also investigated the matter and filed charge sheet and on perusal of the charge sheet material also, the complainant is the only witness and no eye witnesses who have witnessed the incident have given any statements. The only circumstantial witnesses are CW. Nos.2, 3 and 4 and none of the witnesses also spoken with regard to taking of caste name of the complainant and insulting her in the presence of the general public to attract the ingredients of the offence under Section 3[1][r] and 3[1][s]. The

¶38

¶39

other penal provisions are invoked at the time of filing the charge sheet. Having taken note of the ingredients of the offences and also looking into the complaint averments and the charge sheet material, when the act of removing her name in the voters list has been questioned an altercation had taken place. It is also alleged that they are not tolerating her prosperity from last 8-9 months, they adopted the delayed tactics. The other allegation is also against senior Member of the Bar in order to prevent her from exercising her right, she was prevented. Having taken note of the averments made in the complaint and also the charge sheet material, the same does not attract the offences which have been invoked against the petitioners herein. Having perused the complaint averments and statement of witnesses, in the absence of any ingredients of the offence which have been invoked and if any right has been curtailed in not giving her right to franchise her vote and removing her name from the voters list, the

¶40

¶41

complainant ought to have resorted to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief. Instead of that, giving criminal colour to the civil dispute which is found in the Bar Association election, the complainant has initiated criminal prosecution taking advantage of the caste belonging to a particular community and no abuse is made taking her caste name. If the same is allowed in the absence of any ingredients of the offences, it leads to miscarriage of justice. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.PC to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

[a] The IA. No.1/2021 is allowed for quashing charge sheet. Consequently, the petition is allowed.

¶44

[b] The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Crime No.155/2020 of Sakleshpura Town Police and also charge sheet in C.C. No.383/2020 against the

¶45

¶46

petitioners herein on the file of Principal District & Sessions Court, Hassan District, Hassan, are hereby quashed.

¶47

SD/JUDGE

¶48

AN/-

D v. Yashwanth Kumar v State by Sakalespura Town Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D v. Yashwanth Kumar v State by Sakalespura Town Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Subhash Chandra Vs State by K.R.Pete Rural Police Station

Sri M N Manjunath Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Vivek H K Vs the State of Karnataka

T R Prema Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. B. R. Prabhakara Vs State of Karnataka