Bombay High Court
Gopal Chandrabhanji Raikwar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its P.S.O. ... on 27 June, 2019
Author: P.N. Deshmukh
Bench: P.N. Deshmukh, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
1 apl117.19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.117 OF 2019
Gopal Chandrabhanji Raikwar,
aged 50 years, occupation :
service, r/o Maroti Ward No.2,
Abdulla Nagar Road, Hinganghat,
Tahsil Hinganghat, District Wardha. ... Applicant
- Versus -
1) State of Maharashtra, through
its Police Station Officer, Wadki,
Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal.
2) Anil Narayanrao Raut,
aged 43 years, occupation : service,
r/o Paneyayat Samiti, Ralegaon,
Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal. ... Non-applicants
-----------------
Shri A.A. Dhawas, Advocate for applicant.
Ms. T. Udeshi, Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant no.1.
Shri S.S. Bhalerao, Advocate for non-applicant no.2.
----------------
CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH AND
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
DATED : JUNE 27, 2019
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.N. DESHMUKH, J.) :
Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of learned Counsel for the parties.
::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 :::
2 apl117.19
2) This application is for quashing of First Information Report No.162/2018 registered by Police Station, Wadki, Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
3) Shri Dhawas, learned Counsel for applicant, submits that while applicant was working as Assistant Teacher in Zilla Parishad, his service came to be terminated by order dated 13/4/2018 for want of caste validity certificate. On 12/8/2013 proposal for verification of caste of applicant came to be forwarded through proper channel to Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, which Committee conducted enquiry. However, the Caste Scrutiny Committee did not consider the necessary documents nor gave opportunity to applicant to lead evidence and by passing order dated 8/8/2017 held that petitioner is "Koshti" by caste and not "Halba", thereby invalidating the caste claim of the applicant. It is contended that the applicant was thereafter issued a show cause notice, however, it was not in accordance with law and the same came to be challenged in a writ petition, which was ultimately withdrawn and applicant was granted liberty to file a fresh petition ::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 ::: 3 apl117.19 and accordingly applicant has challenged his caste invalidation order. It is further submitted that on 24/4/2018 non-applicant no.2 lodged report with Wadki Police Station alleging that applicant had secured job as a Teacher in 1993 and had not submitted caste certificate and subsequently his caste certificate was invalidated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee in the year 2017. Accordingly, offences as aforesaid came to be registered.
4) It is further submitted by Shri Dhawas, learned Counsel for applicant, that the provisions made applicable to the applicant are not attracted for want of sufficient evidence. It is also contended that even the Caste Scrutiny Committee did not record any finding that applicant had used or produced false certificate and as such, there is no contravention of Section 11 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. It is also the case of applicant that according to provisions of said Act of 2000, offences could be registered only upon the complaint lodged by the Caste Scrutiny Committee or by any other Officer duly authorized by the Caste ::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 ::: 4 apl117.19 Scrutiny Committee for this purpose and as per Section 11(2) of the said Act of 2000, no Court can take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 11 of the said Act of 2000 except upon complaint made by the Caste Scrutiny Committee or by any other Officer duly authorised by the Caste Scrutiny Committee for this purpose.
5) Perusal of the affidavit-in-reply of the State does not refer to aforesaid aspect. In fact, even the case diary made available by learned Additional Public Prosecutor does not refer to any part of the investigation carried out on the said aspect. As such, submissions advanced by learned Counsel for applicant as aforesaid are found substantiated as in the present case, no complaint was lodged by the Caste Scrutiny Committee or any Officer duly authorised by the Caste Scrutiny Committee for this purpose. In support of his case, applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bajrangsingh s/o Sundersingh Chandel vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2014 ALL MR (Cri) 1307) where in similar facts, it is observed thus :
"8) It is clear that the prosecution is not provided in all the cases in which the caste certificate is invalidated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. It is only in the cases in which the Caste ::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 :::
5 apl117.19 Scrutiny Committee gives a definite finding that the candidate has obtained the caste certificate by giving false information or filing false statement or documents or by any other fraudulent means that the prosecution is permissible." In the present case, there is no finding given by the Caste Scrutiny Committee while invalidating the caste certificate of the applicant that he had obtained the same by furnishing false information or filing false documents or any other fraudulent means. The first information report, therefore, cannot stand to the scrutiny of law. Even otherwise, in view of law laid down in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others (AIR 1992 SC 604), application is liable to be allowed as same would fall in guideline no.1 of seven guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court while considering application for quashing of first information report. Guideline no.1 of the said guidelines would read thus :
"1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused."
6) In the circumstances, criminal application is allowed. First Information Report No.162/2018 registered at Police Station, Wadki, Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal is quashed and set aside. ::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 :::
6 apl117.19
7) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
khj
::: Uploaded on - 01/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2019 03:26:48 :::