Allowed

Gilbert Sequera v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Sept 2023CRL.P/1424/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash proceedings against Section 3(1)(j) POA and manual scavenging act allegations. The court held that absence of CCTV footage and mismatched photographs made the case an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Quashed of impugned proceedings in Spl.C.No.276/2022 in Crime No.240/2021 against the petitioner.

Gilbert Sequera Vs State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:33044 CRL.P No. 1424 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1424 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

GILBERT SEQUERA, S/O LATE. JOHN BAPTIST SEQUERA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, NO.21, 1ST B MAIN, VIGNANA NAGAR, NEW TIPPASANDRA POST, BENGALURU - 560 075.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. B. J. HITESH GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY INDIRANAGAR P.S., BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (GRADE 01), SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, TC PALYA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 049.

¶13

MALA DAIVADEENAM, S/O LATE. SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, NO.21, 4TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, TC PALYA MAIN ROAD, RAJESHWARI LAYOUT, AKSHAY NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 049.

¶14

¶15

NC: 2023:KHC:33044 CRL.P No. 1424 of 2023

¶16

(RESPONDENT NO.3 IS IMPLEADED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED: 24.03.2023)

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. M. R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SMT. MANORANJINI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN SPL.C.NO.276/2022 IN CR.NO.240/2021 AT INDIRANAGARA P.S., FOR AN OFFENCE U/S 7,8,9 OF PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND THEIR REHABILITATION ACT, 2013 SEC.3(1)(j) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT PENDING BEFORE THE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. JUDGE (CCH-71) BANGALORE.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioner - accused No.3 is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Section 3(i) (j) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 7, 8 and 9 of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

¶23

Initially, FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 3 alleging that the defacto complainant was forcibly made to enter the manhole for the purpose of cleaning the drain. The police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner/accused No.3 herein and dropped the other accused from the charge sheet on the ground that there is no material to substantiate the allegations against them.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:33044 CRL.P No. 1424 of 2023

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the footage of the CCTV installed at the place of incident was sent to the Group Cyber ID Technology Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru for analysis. The Group Cyber ID Technology Pvt. Ltd. has submitted a report stating that the exhibit DVR hard disk marked '01a' does not contain any video clips related to manual scavenging. Therefore, in the absence of any material, that the petitioner/accused No.3 herein forced the victim to enter manhole for the purpose of cleaning the drain, the continuation of criminal proceedings only on the basis of the self serving statement of the victim will be an abuse of process of law.

¶27

Learned HCGP for the State submits that the charge sheet material discloses that the petitioner herein forced the victim to enter the manhole which constitutes the commission of the offences alleged against him and the veracity of the allegation against the petitioner can be considered at the time of the trial, and the same cannot be gone into in this petition.

¶28

Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

The police during the course of investigation collected the footage of the CCTV installed at the place of incident, and sent to the Group Cyber ID Technology Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru. The laboratory submitted a report dated 21.01.2022 stating that the exhibit DVR hard disc marked as '01a' does not contain any video clips related to the Manual Scavenging. To

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:33044 CRL.P No. 1424 of 2023

¶31

substantiate the allegations against the petitioner, the police have collected the pictures to establish that the victim was made to enter the manhole for the purpose of cleaning the drain. However, a perusal of the photographs produced along with the charge sheet does not disclose that the manhole in which the victim was allegedly made to enter forcibly is the manhole which is situated within the premises of the hospital in which the petitioner is the House Keeping Manager.

¶32

It is also highly improbable that the victim would pose for a picture when he was made to enter the manhole forcibly. There are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident and the CCTV footage clearly indicates that there are no video clips relating to the alleged incident.

¶33

The alleged incident has taken place on 09.12.2021 between 1.00 p.m. to 2.00 p.m. and the CCTV footage dated 09.12.2021 between 12.45 to 2.00 p.m., does not contain that the petitioner forcibly made the victim to enter the manhole to clean the drain.

¶34

Hence, the FIR lodged against the petitioner was with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings in absence of incriminating materials against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. Criminal petition is allowed.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:33044 CRL.P No. 1424 of 2023

¶39

ii. The impugned proceedings in Spl.C.No.276/2022 in Crime No.240/2021 pending on the file of the LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed in so far as it relates to the petitioner herein.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

MH/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 96 CT:PH

Gilbert Sequera v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gilbert Sequera v. State of Karnataka

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 Ramesh Kumar Vs Smt Shyamala Shree v

Sri.K.N.Shreyas Vs Sri.Deepchand Jain

Sri. Raghuram Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Amster Labs Vs State at the Instance the Drugs Inspector

Mr. Mohammed Basheer Vs the State of Karnataka

Rizwan @ Rizu Vs State of Karnataka