Vithal Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/SEC 528 OF BNSS, 2023 PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION OF THE PETITIONER AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO. 11/2022 OF MARKET POLICE STATION BIDAR AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1/PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC 196, 198, 420, 109 OF IPC AND SEC 3(1)(q) OF SC/ST (P.A) ACT AND SEC 5(A), 5(b) OF KARNATAKA SC/ST & OTHER B.C. (RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENT) ACT, 1990, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGE BIDAR,

¶20

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1464 CRL.P No. 200266 of 2025

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.11/2022 of respondent – police for the offences punishable under Sections 196, 198, 420, 109 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(q) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 5A, 5B of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation Of Appointment) Act, 1990 pending on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar.

¶26

Factual matrix of the case :

¶27

It is the case of the prosecution that, on 24.02.2022 at about 8.45 p.m., the complainant filed a complaint before the respondent -police stating that accused No.1 was working as a mechanic in Telephone office, had lodged a

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1464 CRL.P No. 200266 of 2025

¶29

complaint before the Human Rights against one Kalyan Rao S/o Maruthappa. The Department of Human Rights conducted an enquiry on 29.05.2010 and found that he did not belong to Schedule Tribe. However, he forged the documents and obtained the same from the Tahsildar office on 01.08.1994 to secure a job at telephone office as a mechanic under reservation quota.

¶30

The District Caste Verification Committee declared the said certificate as invalid on 26.12.2017. On the basis of the said nullity of the document, a criminal case has been registered in Crime No.11/2022.

¶31

Heard Sri. Gururaj V Hasilkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri. Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri.C.Jagadish, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶32

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even on reading the entire averments of the complaint, there are no ingredients which would attract the provisions as stated in the FIR.

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1464 CRL.P No. 200266 of 2025

¶35

It is further submitted that even though the case has been registered in the year 2022, no progress is forthcoming in the investigation. Charge sheet not yet filed. The petitioner is deprived of having a speedy trial. Therefore, the petition is required to be allowed and the proceedings has to be quashed. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶36

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State vehemently opposed the said submissions and he further submitted that, the petitioner being an employee was working at Telephone Exchange, Bidar stated to have obtained job on reservation quota, even though, he does not belongs to the said reservation quota.

¶37

It is further submitted that the District Caste Verification Committee has nullified the caste certificate stating that, it is obtained by playing fraud. Therefore, there are no materials to quash the proceedings. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 - State prays to reject the petition.

¶38

5 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1464 CRL.P No. 200266 of 2025

¶40

Similarly, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 adopted the arguments of learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶41

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents available on record, it appears from the record that the petitioner, namely, Vithal was working as a mechanic in telephone office by producing the fake caste certificate. Enquiry had been initiated in respect of the said caste certificate and the Authority had nullified the said caste certificate. Such being the fact, this Court, at this stage, cannot come to the conclusion that the petitioner has not committed any offences.

¶42

When there is a prima-facie case made out against the petitioner, under such circumstances, it would not be appropriate to quash the proceedings.

¶43

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has not made out a case to grant relief as prayed for. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly.

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1464 CRL.P No. 200266 of 2025

¶45

6 -

¶46

However, it is directed the concerned respondent - police to submit a report at the earliest, not less than six months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of

¶47

this order.

¶48

The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the

¶49

concerned police station forthwith.

¶50

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶51

TMP/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26, CT:PK

Vithal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vithal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Mustafa Vs the State of Karnataka

Anwar Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashok Vs the State of Karnataka

Umadevi and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.

Prakash Vs the State of Karnataka

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka