Disposed

Reshma v. State by

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2024CRL.A/1376/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Bengaluru disposed of a criminal appeal challenging the dismissal of an anticipatory bail application. Instead of deciding the merits, the court directed the appellant to file a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. within 15 days to enable regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of; direction to prefer application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. within 15 days for regular bail; restraint on police from coercive steps.

Reshma Vs State by — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1376 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

RESHMA, W/O Y.G.HONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O YEDAKERE VILLAGE, YESALURU HOBLI, SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 165.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. PULAKESHI A P., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

STATE BY SAKALESHPURA TOWN POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶13

VASHISTA S.R., POLICE SUB - INSPECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT, 114, 10^TH MAIN, SAN MARG, SIDDARTHA LAYOUT, MYSORE – 570 011.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI.C.JAGADISH, SPL. P.P., FOR R2; SRI.RANGASWAMY R., HCGP FOR R1)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶18

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.05.2024 PASSED BY THE ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN CRL.MISC.NO.424/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE - C AND GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANT IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE P/U/S 197, 198, 420 OF IPC AND U/S 3(1)(q) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT 1989 AND U/S 5(b) OF KARNATAKA SC/ST AND OTHER B.C. (RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENT ACT) 1990 IN RESPONDENT NO.1/SAKALESHAPURA TOWN POLICE STATION CR.NO.210/2023 AND THE APPELLANT MAY KINDLY BE ENLARGED ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARREST.

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Heard the learned counsel appearing for appellant,

¶23

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 - State and learned Special Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 i.e., Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement.

¶24

Perused the materials on record.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶26

The appellant is arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime No.210/2023 of Sakaleshapura Town Police Station, Hassan, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 197, 198, 420 of IPC, under Section 3(1)(q) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 5(b) of Karnataka SC/ST and other B.C. (Reservation of Appointment Act) 1990.

¶27

The first informant/Police Sub-Inspector, Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement, Mysore, lodged a complaint before Sakaleshpura Town Police, on the basis of which, the aforementioned crime was registered against the appellant and three others.

¶28

Apprehending her arrest, the appellant filed an application under Section 438 of Cr.PC in Crl.Misc.No.424/2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, which was dismissed vide order dated 07.05.2024.

¶29

6. Appellant has preferred this appeal praying to

¶30

set aside the impugned order and to enlarge her on bail.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶33

The allegations are that, the appellant

¶34

Smt. Reshma, W/o. Y.G. Honnappa, resident of Yedakere village, Sakaleshpura Taluk, Hassan District, originally belong to muslim community, but obtained a false Caste Certificate on 20.08.2014 from the Tahsildar, Sakaleshpura Taluk, stating that she belong to Adi Karnataka Caste, notified as Scheduled Caste.

¶35

Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 contended that the District Caste Verification Committee, Hassan, on enquiry, has annulled the Caste Certificate issued by the Tahsildar in favour of the appellant and the said order has not been challenged and therefore, there is a prima-facie case against the appellant. He contended that the learned Sessions Judge has rightly dismissed the prayer seeking anticipatory bail, in view of the bar under Section 18 and 18-A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶38

It is contended by the learned counsel

¶39

appearing for the appellant that the order passed by the Caste Verification Committee is not final and therefore, it cannot be said at this stage that the appellant has obtained a false Caste Certificate by suppressing the true facts. He contended that the said order passed by the Caste Verification Committee was not communicated to the appellant. He contended that even otherwise, there is no material at this stage to show that the appellant had intentionally obtained false Caste Certificate. He submits that appellant's husband belong to Scheduled Caste (Adi Karnataka) and therefore, the allegation that the appellant obtained false Caste Certificate by suppressing the fact is incorrect.

¶40

On the basis of the order passed by the District Caste Verification Committee dated 18.11.2020, the Tahsildar, Sakaleshpur on 23.02.2021, has cancelled the Caste Certificate issued to the appellant on 20.08.2014. Subsequently, the Police Sub Inspector, Civil Rights

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶42

Enforcement Directorate, Mysore, lodged the complaint on 08.11.2023, based on which, the aforementioned case was registered against the appellant and others.

¶43

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the appellant is now aware of the order passed by the District Caste Verification Committee, she is intending to challenge the same before the appropriate Authority.

¶44

The learned Sessions Judge, observing that there are serious allegations of obtaining false Caste Certificate and prima facie materials are produced on record, proceeded to dismiss the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. holding that the accused is not entitled for Anticipatory Bail in view of the bar under Section 18A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶45

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons stated above, the appellant can be permitted to appear before the Sessions Court and

¶46

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:35445 CRL.A No. 1376 of 2024

¶47

file an application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. If such an application is filed within 15 days from today, the learned Sessions Judge shall consider it on the same day and enlarge the appellant/accused on bail imposing necessary conditions, which it deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. In the meantime the respondent/Police shall not take any coercive steps against the appellant.

¶48

With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of .

¶49

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶50

PN,GSR CT: SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

Reshma v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reshma v. State by

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

Smt. Revamma @ Ammanni Vs State by Cod, Ndc

Manjunatha @ Musare Manja Vs State by Thilakpark Police Station

Vishwanatha S @ Vishwa Vs State by

Sri Pravina Vs State of Karnataka

Ganesha Vs State of Karanataka

Shashikumar Vs the State of Karnataka