S Sathyendraprakash Vs Superindent of Police

S SATHYENDRAPRAKASH S/O LATE P.SUCHITHANANDA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O BETHEL NILAYA, OPP TO TULASI, KALYANA MANDIRA, HIRIYUR ROAD, HIRIYUR-577 598 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. GOPALKRISHNA KURANDWAD.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SUPERINDENT OF POLICE CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT CELL, NO.1389/32, 3^RD CROSS, SHIVAKUMARASWAMI BADAVANE, DAVANAGERE.

¶15

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT CELL, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560002 KARNATAKA.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. C. JAGADISH.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28357 WP No. 46755 of 2017

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENQUIRY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY R-1 UNDER THE POLICE NOTICE, SECTION 91 CR.P.C. (REGARDING CASTE ENQUIRY) DATED.13.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEX-A.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the proceeding initiated by the respondent No.1 by issuing a notice dated 13.06.2017 under Section 91 of Cr.PC.

¶25

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was an employee of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), joined services as operator in the year 1983 under Scheduled Tribe category as he belonging to 'Koraga (converted Christian) caste' and now he is retired from his service. That upon a private complaint filed by certain R. Ravichandra, General Secretary of National Confederation of Bahujana Organization, Karnataka State, Kengeri Upanagara, Bangalore, respondent No.1 had conducted enquiry and final report in this regard was submitted to respondent No.2-

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28357 WP No. 46755 of 2017

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Additional Director General of Police in the year 2014-2015. Thereafter the respondent No.1-Civil Rights Enforcement Cell (C.R.E Cell for short) had issued present notice dated 13.06.2017 under Section 91 of Cr.PC calling upon the petitioner to appear for enquiry and to give a statement with respect to earlier enquiry.

¶29

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in WA No.36/2021 dated 30.08.2021 submits that the respondent No.1-C.R.E Cell would get jurisdiction to enquire into the matter, only upon the matter being forwarded to it by the District Caste Verification Committee (DCVC for short) in terms of Rule 7 (4) of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Rules, 1992 (Rules, 1992 for short), until such time, respondent No.1-C.R.E Cell cannot on its own initiate the enquiry. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition.

¶30

4. Though learned Special Counsel appearing for the respondents do not dispute this legal position of the matter,

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28357 WP No. 46755 of 2017

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

however, insists that since the proceedings were initiated at the instance of a complainant, he should be notified in the matter.

¶34

5. Heard. Perused the records.

¶35

6. The question with regard to the authority of the respondent No.1 to initiate the proceedings on its own being without jurisdiction, is no more res-integra . In the instant case, there is no reference by the DCVC as required under Rule 7 of the Rules, 1992. Facts indicate that inquiry was conducted, report was submitted in the year 2014-2015 itself and there has been no reference by DCVC. Therefore, the issuance of notice by the respondent No.1, clearly is one without jurisdiction.

¶36

7. Accordingly, the following;

¶37

ORDER

¶38

(i) The petition is allowed .

¶39

(ii) The Notice dated 13.06.2017 issued by respondent

¶40

No.1 as per Annexure-A is quashed.

¶41

(iii) It is made clear that Deputy Commissioner is at

¶42

liberty to initiate proceedings as contemplated under

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:28357 WP No. 46755 of 2017

¶44

5 -

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Section 4(f) Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990. If such proceedings are initiated, he may also notify the same to the complainant at whose instance the proceedings

¶47

were initiated.

¶48

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶49

RU

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

S Sathyendraprakash v. Superindent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S Sathyendraprakash v. Superindent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sowmya Vs Assistant Commissioner

Omar Sheriff Vs the Manager

Mr. N. Theerthagiri Vs the Authorised Officer

P.Bharathi Murthy Vs the Joint Director

K. P. Prasad Vs State of Karnataka

Sudarshan Pharmaceuticals Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka