SRI SRIPATHY M K vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
®
CNR: KAHC010449712025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9743 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SRIPATHY M K
S/O SRI KRISHNA MURTHY C R
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
WORKING AS REVENUE INSPECTER
VEMGAL HOBLI
KOLAR TALUK OFFICE
KOLAR-563101
NOW WORKING AS REVENUE INSPECTOR
LAKKUR HBLI,
MALUR TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563130
2. SMT. B. NAGAVENI,
D/O SRI. BISAPP
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
WORKING AS TASILDIHAR,
KOLAR TALUK,
KOLAR-563 101
NOW WORKING AS TASILIDHAR,
KGF TALUK, KGF-563 113
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAJESH GOWDA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY GULPET POLLICE STATION,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR-563 101
REPRESENTED BY
SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BANGALORE-560 001
2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
GENERAL OF POLICE
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
OFFICE AT NO.1, FIRST FLOOR,
D.T.E BUILDING, PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001
3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT,
OFFICE AT NO.1, FIRST FLOOR,
D.T.E BUILDING, PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560001
4. THE POLICE INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT
KOLAR UNIT, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING,
KOLAR-563 101
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, FOR R1;
SRI. C. JAGADEESH., SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S
528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR (CRIME) NO.34/2023, FOR
THE PUNISHABLE U/S. 467, 468, 471, 198, 420 OF IPC, SEC.3(1)(q)
OF SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT 1989 AND U/S
5(A) 5(b) OF KARNATAKA SC/ST AND OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES
(RESERVATION OF APPOINTMENT ACT), 1990, PENDING ON THE
ND
FILE OF 2 ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR
DISTRICT, CASE REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1/GULPET P.S.,
KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs;
a) Quash the FIR (Crime) No.34/2023, for the
punishable u/s. 467, 468, 471, 198, 420 of IPC,
sec.3(1)(q) of SC and ST (Prevention Of
Atrocities Act 1989 and u/s 5(a) 5(b) of
Karnataka SC/ST and other backward classes
(Reservation of Appointment Act), 1990,
nd
pending on the file of 2 Addl. District and
Sessions Judge, Kolar District, case registered
by respondent no.1/Gulpet P.S., Kolar town,
Kolar
b) Pass any other order or orders as this Hon’ble
Court deems fit under the circumstances of the
case.
2. The complaint was lodged by the Police Inspector,
Civil Rights Enforcement Directorate, arrayed as
respondent No. 2, alleging that accused No. 1, Smt.
Lakshmamma, who belongs to the Ganiga
community, had obtained a caste certificate by
falsely claiming that she belonged to the Adi-
Karnataka Scheduled Caste. It is alleged that, upon
an enquiry conducted by the District Caste
Verification Committee, Kolar, the Committee
concluded that Smt. Lakshmamma belonged to the
Ganiga community and not to the Adi-Karnataka
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
community and, consequently, cancelled the caste
certificate issued in her favour. Since the caste
certificate had been issued by the Tahsildar on the
basis of the reports and recommendations of the
Revenue Inspector and the Village Accountant, the
concerned revenue officials were also arrayed as
accused.
3. Acting upon the said complaint, Gulpet Police Station
registered FIR in Crime No. 34/2023 on 18.04.2023
for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468,
471, 198 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(IPC), Section 3(1)(q) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989, and Sections 5A and 5B of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments,
etc.) Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act
of 1990 ”).
4. Aggrieved by the registration of the said FIR, the
petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 2 and
3, have approached this Court invoking its
jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
5. Sri Rajesh Gowda, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, submits that:
5.1. The petitioners, being the Revenue Inspector
and the Tahsildar, the State Government’s
sanction contemplated under Section 6 of the
Act of 1990 has not been obtained. In the
absence of such sanction, it is contended that
the prosecution cannot lawfully be instituted
and that the proceedings are liable to be
quashed.
5.2. Secondly, learned counsel submits that the
petitioners acted in good faith in the discharge
of their official duties and are, therefore,
entitled to the protection afforded by Section 11
of the Act of 1990.
5.3. He further submits that an offence under
Section 5B of the said Act requires intentional
issuance of a false caste certificate by the
Tahsildar and that, in the absence of the
requisite intention, the provision would not be
attracted.
5.4. With regard to Section 5A of the Act of 1990,
learned counsel submits that the provision
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
applies to a person who obtains a caste
certificate by furnishing false information, filing
a false statement or adopting any other
fraudulent means. According to him, the said
provision is directed against the person who
obtains the certificate and cannot, on the
allegations presently made, be invoked against
the petitioners, who are the officials concerned
with its issuance.
5.5. Learned counsel further submits that the
offences punishable under Sections 467, 468,
471, 198 and 420 of the IPC, having regard to
their respective ingredients, are attributable to
accused No. 1, who allegedly obtained and used
the caste certificate, and not to the petitioners
merely by reason of their official involvement in
processing or issuing the same.
5.6. Insofar as Section 3(1)(q) of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, is concerned, learned
counsel submits that the allegation of furnishing
false information pertains to accused No. 1 and
that the said provision cannot automatically be
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
invoked against the petitioners in the absence
of allegations satisfying its ingredients.
5.7. In support of his submissions, learned counsel
places reliance on the decision of a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in Sri G. Chandrappa v.
State of Karnataka and Others , W.P. No.
23834/2022, decided on 05.03.2024, wherein,
according to him, the proceedings under
Section 3(1)(q) of the 1989 Act, insofar as the
Tahsildar was concerned, came to be quashed.
6. Per contra, Sri C. Jagadeesh, learned counsel
appearing for respondents Nos. 2 to 4, submits that:
6.1. With regard to Section 5B of the Act of 1990,
learned counsel submits that the provision
specifically penalises a Tahsildar who
intentionally issues a false caste certificate or
income and caste certificate. Whether the
certificate was issued intentionally, with the
requisite knowledge or otherwise, is a matter
requiring investigation and, if necessary, trial.
Such an issue cannot be conclusively
determined at the threshold in proceedings
under Section 482 of the CrPC, particularly
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
when the allegations concern the issuance of a
false caste certificate.
6.2. On the question of sanction, learned counsel
submits that Section 6 of the Act of 1990 does
not require sanction as a condition precedent
for lodging a complaint or registering an FIR.
According to him, the requirement of sanction
must be considered at the appropriate stage of
the criminal proceedings i.e., taking
Cognisance. He accordingly submits that the
absence of sanction at the stage of registration
of the FIR does not, by itself, warrant quashing
of the investigation.
6.3. With regard to Sections 5A and 3(1)(q), learned
counsel submits that the allegations concerning
the obtaining of the caste certificate by
furnishing false information are principally
directed against accused No. 1. The precise
offences, if any, attracted against each accused
can be determined by the Investigating Officer
upon completion of the investigation and
consideration of the material collected.
6.4. As regards Sections 467, 468, 471, 198 and
420 of the IPC, learned counsel submits that
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
the question whether the alleged fabrication,
forgery, use of a forged document or cheating
was committed by accused No. 1 alone or in
concert with the petitioners requires
investigation. The role of each accused and the
applicability of the respective penal provisions
cannot, according to him, be conclusively
determined merely from the fact that the
petitioners are public officials who participated
in the process of issuing the certificate.
7. Heard Sri Rajesh Gowda, learned counsel for the
petitioners, and Sri C. Jagadeesh, learned counsel for
respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Perused papers.
8. The following points arise for determination:
(i) Whether sanction of the State Government
under Section 6 of the Act of 1990 is a
condition precedent for lodging a
complaint or registering an FIR, or
whether the requirement arises at a
subsequent stage of the criminal
proceedings i.e., taking Cognisance?
(ii) Whether, where an FIR alleges multiple
offences against multiple accused, each
offence must be specifically attributed to
each accused at the stage of registration
of the FIR?
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
(iii) Whether the question of intentional
issuance of a false caste certificate and the
plea of protection for action taken in good
faith can be conclusively determined in
proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC
at the present stage?
(iv) What order?
9. This Court answers the above points as follows:
10. Answer to Point No. (i): Whether sanction of
the State Government under Section 6 of the
Act of 1990 is a condition precedent for lodging
a complaint or registering an FIR, or whether
the requirement arises at a subsequent stage of
the criminal proceedings i.e., taking
Cognisance?
10.1. The first contention urged on behalf of the
petitioners concerns the absence of sanction
under Section 6 of the Act of 1990. Learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners, being public officials who
participated in the process of issuance of the
caste certificate, cannot be subjected to
prosecution under the said Act without the
sanction of the State Government. Per contra,
learned counsel for the respondents submits
that the absence of sanction at the stage of
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
registration of the FIR does not render the
investigation illegal and that the requirement of
sanction must be examined at the stage
prescribed by the statute.
10.2. Section 6 of the Act of 1990 reads as follows:
“6. Cognizance of offences .—No prosecution for an
offence under this Act shall be instituted except by, or
with the sanction of the State Government.”
10.3. The provision is a statutory restriction on the
institution of prosecution for offences under the
Act. Its object and effect must be understood
from the language employed by the Legislature,
read in conjunction with the statutory scheme
governing the investigation and prosecution of
offences.
10.4. It is necessary to distinguish between the
registration of an FIR, investigation into the
allegations, institution of prosecution and the
taking of cognizance by a competent Court.
These are distinct stages in the administration
of criminal justice. The registration of an FIR
ordinarily initiates the process of investigation
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
and does not, by itself, amount to the
institution of prosecution before a Court.
10.5. At the same time, the requirement of sanction
cannot be rendered ineffective by treating it as
a formality that may be complied with at any
stage irrespective of the language of the
statute. The stage at which sanction must be
obtained is governed by the statutory provision
and its authoritative judicial interpretation. The
heading of Section 6, which refers to
cognizance of offences, must be considered
along with the operative text, which expressly
refers to the institution of prosecution.
10.6. In the present case, the petitioners seek
quashing of the FIR on the ground that sanction
had not been obtained before the registration
of the crime. The question at this stage is not
whether the petitioners may ultimately be
prosecuted without sanction, but whether the
absence of sanction at the time of registration
of the FIR is, by itself, sufficient to invalidate
the investigation.
10.7. The distinction assumes significance because
the FIR records allegations requiring
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
investigation into the circumstances in which
the caste certificate came to be issued, the
information furnished by the applicant, the
reports submitted by the revenue officials and
the decision taken by the Tahsildar. The
statutory restriction on prosecution must be
enforced at the stage required by law, but it
does not follow that every investigative step
taken before that stage is necessarily void.
10.8. The petitioners have not demonstrated, merely
by referring to the absence of sanction at the
time of registration of the FIR, that the
registration of the crime itself is prohibited by
Section 6. The requirement of sanction must
nevertheless be complied with at the stage
mandated by the provision, and the competent
Court must not proceed in disregard of the
statutory bar.
10.9. Accordingly, this Court answers Point No. 1 by
holding that the absence of sanction at the
stage of registration of the FIR does not, by
itself, warrant quashing of the FIR. This finding
shall not be construed as dispensing with the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
requirement of sanction at the stage at which
the statute mandates it.
11. Answer to Point No. (ii): Whether, where an
FIR alleges multiple offences against multiple
accused, each offence must be specifically
attributed to each accused at the stage of
registration of the FIR?
11.1. The second point for consideration concerns the
manner in which the offences alleged in the FIR
are to be examined when several persons are
arrayed as accused and multiple penal
provisions have been invoked.
11.2. In the present case, accused No. 1 is alleged to
have obtained a caste certificate by claiming to
belong to the Adi-Karnataka Scheduled Caste,
whereas the petitioners, who are the Revenue
Inspector and the Tahsildar, are alleged to have
participated in the process of issuance of the
said certificate. The petitioners contend that the
offences alleged in the FIR, other than those
specifically applicable to the officials, relate to
accused No. 1. Per contra, the respondents
submit that the precise role of each accused
and the applicability of the respective penal
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
provisions can be ascertained only upon
completion of the investigation.
11.3. Having considered the rival submissions, this
Court is of the opinion that, at the stage of
registration of an FIR, it is not necessary that
each offence invoked therein should be
conclusively attributed to each accused. An FIR
sets out the allegations which necessitate
investigation. Where the allegations disclose
the commission of an offence, the Investigating
Officer is required to investigate the
circumstances in which the offence was
committed, the persons who may be
responsible for its commission and the penal
provisions attracted by the acts and omissions
of the persons concerned, if there is any other
person who was involved in the offence
committed, such person could also be
implicated during investigation.
11.4. The mere invocation of several penal provisions
in an FIR does not mean that all the offences
are necessarily alleged against every accused.
Equally, the fact that a particular offence
appears, at first blush, to relate to one accused
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
does not justify a conclusive determination at
the threshold that no other accused could have
participated in the commission of that offence.
The role of each accused and the applicability of
the relevant provisions must be examined on
the basis of the material collected during the
investigation.
11.5. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the
caste certificate issued in favour of accused No.
1 was subsequently cancelled by the District
Caste Verification Committee, Kolar, upon an
enquiry in which it was concluded that accused
No. 1 belonged to the Ganiga community and
not to the Adi-Karnataka community. The
cancellation of the certificate provides the
factual basis for examining the circumstances in
which it was obtained and issued.
11.6. However, the fact that the certificate has been
cancelled does not, by itself, conclusively
establish the criminal liability of any particular
accused. The question as to who furnished false
information, who verified the information, what
reports were submitted by the Revenue
Inspector and the Village Accountant, what
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
material was available to the Tahsildar and
whether any of the officials knowingly or
intentionally participated in the issuance of a
false certificate are matters which require
investigation.
11.7. It is the investigation that must bring forth the
relevant facts and the role attributable to each
accused. On the basis of the material so
collected, the Investigating Officer would be
required to determine which offences are made
out against which accused and to lay the
appropriate final report in accordance with law.
11.8. Section 5A of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes
(Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990,
provides for punishment of a person who
obtains a caste certificate or income and caste
certificate by furnishing false information, filing
a false statement or adopting any other
fraudulent means. On the allegations in the
present case, accused No. 1 is alleged to have
obtained the certificate by furnishing false
information regarding her caste.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
11.9. Whether accused No. 1 obtained the certificate
by the means contemplated under Section 5A is
a matter to be examined on the basis of the
material collected during investigation. The role
of the petitioners and the applicability of other
penal provisions to their conduct must likewise
be determined in the light of the allegations and
the evidence gathered during the investigation.
At this stage, this Court would not be justified
in conclusively determining the liability or
otherwise of each accused merely on the basis
of the description of their respective official
positions.
11.10. Section 3(1)(q) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, concerns the giving of false or
frivolous information to a public servant,
thereby causing such public servant to use
lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a
member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled
Tribe.
11.11. The applicability of this provision must be
examined with reference to the information
allegedly furnished, the person who furnished
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
it, the exercise of lawful power resulting
therefrom and the other ingredients of the
offence. The allegation that accused No. 1
furnished false information for obtaining the
caste certificate is required to be investigated in
that context. At the same time, the role, if any,
of the petitioners in the alleged commission of
the offence must be assessed on the basis of
the material collected. The Concerned officers
are required to examine the genuineness
and/or falsity of the information furnished; an
officer is not expected to accept all information
furnished without verification.
11.12. It would, therefore, be premature at this stage
to record a conclusive finding either that
Section 3(1)(q) is attracted against the
petitioners or that its application to them is
excluded in all circumstances. The Investigating
Officer must examine the allegations and the
material collected and determine the
applicability of the provision in accordance with
law.
11.13. The decision in Sri G. Chandrappa which was
rendered in the facts of that case is accepted,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
at this stage without investigation it cannot be
said that Section 3(1)(q) is not attracted
against the petitioners.
11.14. The same principle applies to the offences
punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 198
and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
invoked in the FIR. Whether the issuance of the
caste certificate involved forgery of a document
falling within the scope of the relevant
provision, whether any person committed
forgery for the purpose of cheating, whether a
forged document was knowingly or dishonestly
used as genuine, whether a certificate known to
be materially false was corruptly used, and
whether the ingredients of cheating are
satisfied are questions which must be examined
in the course of the investigation.
11.15. The subsequent cancellation of the caste
certificate is a relevant circumstance
necessitating examination of the manner in
which the certificate was obtained and issued.
Nevertheless, the commission of each of the
aforesaid offences and the liability of the
individual accused cannot be presumed merely
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
from the cancellation of the certificate. The
material collected must be assessed with
reference to the ingredients of each offence.
11.16. Insofar as the petitioners are concerned, the
investigation must ascertain the nature of the
reports submitted by the Revenue Inspector
and the Village Accountant, the basis on which
the Tahsildar issued the certificate, the material
available to the concerned officials at the
relevant time and whether the acts of any of
them disclose the commission of an offence. It
is only upon such examination that the
respective roles of the accused and the
applicability of the penal provisions can be
determined.
11.17. The contention that the offences under Sections
467, 468, 471, 198 and 420 of the IPC relate
exclusively to accused No. 1 cannot be
accepted as a conclusive proposition at the
stage of registration of the FIR. Equally, the
invocation of those provisions does not, by
itself, establish the criminal liability of the
petitioners.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
11.18. Section 5B of the Act of 1990 specifically
provides for punishment where the Tahsildar
intentionally issues a false caste certificate or
income and caste certificate. The question
whether the certificate was intentionally issued,
and whether the material collected discloses the
requisite intention on the part of the Tahsildar,
must be examined in the light of the
circumstances surrounding its issuance.
11.19. The fact that the certificate was subsequently
cancelled does not, by itself, establish the
requisite intention. At the same time, the
cancellation of the certificate, together with the
allegations concerning its issuance, warrants
investigation into the circumstances in which
the certificate came to be issued and the role
played by the officials concerned.
11.20. Section 5B expressly refers to the Tahsildar.
The liability of the Revenue Inspector, if any,
must be considered under the applicable
provisions of law, having regard to the acts and
omissions alleged against that officer and the
material collected during the investigation. The
respective liability of the Tahsildar, the Revenue
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
Inspector and accused No. 1 cannot be
conclusively determined merely from the fact
that the certificate was issued and subsequently
cancelled.
11.21. In the circumstances, this Court is of the
opinion that the questions as to which accused
committed which offence, whether the requisite
ingredients of the respective offences are
satisfied and whether the acts of the petitioners
were performed in good faith or with the
intention contemplated under the applicable
penal provisions must be examined in the
course of a detailed investigation.
11.22. Upon completion of the investigation, the
Investigating Officer shall assess the material
collected, identify the offences, if any, made
out against each accused and submit the
appropriate final report in accordance with law.
The competent Court shall thereafter consider
the matter in accordance with the applicable
procedural and substantive law.
11.23. Accordingly, this Court answers Point No. (ii) by
holding that the invocation of multiple penal
provisions in an FIR does not require that each
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
offence be conclusively attributed to each
accused at the stage of registration of the FIR.
The determination of the specific offences
attracted against each accused must be made
on the basis of the material collected during the
investigation and in accordance with law.
12. Answer to Point No. (iii): Whether the question
of intentional issuance of a false caste
certificate and the plea of protection for action
taken in good faith can be conclusively
determined in proceedings under Section 482 of
the CrPC at the present stage?
12.1. As noticed above, Section 5B of the Karnataka
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes (Reservation of
Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990, penalises a
Tahsildar who intentionally issues a false caste
certificate or income and caste certificate. The
falsity of a certificate and the intention with
which it was issued are distinct matters. The
cancellation of a certificate by the competent
authority may furnish the basis for further
inquiry; however, such cancellation does not,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
by itself, conclusively establish the criminal
intention of the officer who issued it.
12.2. Section 11 of the Act of 1990 reads as follows:
“11. Protection of action taken in good faith. —No
suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie
against any person for anything which is done in good
faith or intended to be done under this Act.”
12.3. Section 11 affords protection in respect of acts
done, or intended to be done, in good faith
under the Act. Whether the protection is
available depends upon the nature of the act
and the circumstances in which it was
performed. The mere assertion that an act was
performed in the discharge of official duties
does not, by itself, conclusively establish good
faith. Equally, the subsequent cancellation of a
caste certificate does not, without more,
establish that the officer who issued it acted
intentionally or in bad faith.
12.4. The allegations concerning the reports
submitted by the revenue officials, the material
available to them at the relevant time, the
verification undertaken, the procedure followed
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
and the circumstances surrounding the issuance
of the certificate must be considered in
determining whether the statutory ingredients
of the alleged offences are made out and
whether the protection under Section 11 is
attracted.
12.5. The inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of
the CrPC is intended to prevent abuse of the
process of any Court and to secure the ends of
justice. While exercising such jurisdiction, the
Court is not expected to conduct a mini-trial or
undertake a detailed assessment of disputed
evidence. Where the allegations, taken at face
value, disclose the ingredients of an offence
and the issues raised require factual
investigation, the Court would ordinarily refrain
from substituting its assessment of the
evidence for that of the Investigating Officer.
12.6. At the same time, the pendency of an
investigation is not, by itself, a ground to
decline the exercise of inherent jurisdiction.
Where the allegations, even if accepted in their
entirety, do not disclose an offence, or where a
legal bar or other recognised ground for
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
quashing is established, the Court may
intervene notwithstanding that the investigation
is pending.
12.7. The question, therefore, is whether the
allegations and the material placed before this
Court warrant such intervention, without
undertaking a premature determination of
disputed facts.
12.8. In the present case, the petitioners rely upon
the protection under Section 11 of the Act of
1990 and dispute the existence of the intention
contemplated under Section 5B. The
cancellation of the caste certificate, considered
by itself, does not establish the requisite
intention on the part of the petitioners.
However, the allegations concerning their
respective roles in the verification and issuance
of the certificate must be examined in the
context of the material available at the relevant
time and the statutory ingredients of the
offences alleged.
12.9. On the material presently placed before this
Court, the pleas of absence of intention and
good faith cannot be conclusively accepted in
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
favour of the petitioners. Nor is it appropriate,
at this stage, to record a finding that the
petitioners acted intentionally or in bad faith.
Those questions must be considered on the
basis of the relevant material, subject to the
limits of the jurisdiction exercised at the
present stage.
12.10. Accordingly, this Court answers Point No. 3 by
holding that the questions of intention and good
faith cannot be conclusively determined merely
on the basis of the cancellation of the caste
certificate. The disputed questions of intention
and good faith, insofar as they require factual
assessment, are left open for consideration in
accordance with law on investigation being
completed, if a final report is filed against the
Petitioners.
13. Answer to Point No. (iv): What order?
13.1. In view of the findings recorded on Points Nos.
1 to 3, this Court is of the considered opinion
that the grounds urged by the petitioners do
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
not, at this stage, warrant quashing of the FIR
in its entirety.
13.2. The absence of sanction at the stage of
registration of the FIR does not, by itself, justify
such interference. The question of compliance
with Section 6 of the Act of 1990 shall be
addressed at the stage prescribed by law. The
applicability of the individual penal provisions
and the role of each accused shall be assessed
by the Investigating Officer in accordance with
the statutory ingredients of the respective
offences. The questions of intentionality and
good faith shall be considered on the basis of
the material collected and in accordance with
law.
13.3. It is made clear that the observations herein
are confined to the disposal of the present
petition and shall not be construed as findings
on the ultimate guilt or innocence of any
accused.
13.4. In the above background this Court passes the
following:
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
- 30 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57006
CRL.P No. 9743 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010449712025
ORDER
(i) The petition is dismissed , subject to the
observations made hereinabove.
(ii) The Investigating Officer shall proceed in
accordance with law, keeping in view the
distinct ingredients of the offences invoked and
the role, if any, attributable to each accused.
The competent Court shall ensure compliance
with the requirement of sanction under Section
6 of the Act of 1990 at the stage mandated by
law.
(iii) All contentions on the merits of the allegations
are left open for consideration in accordance
with law.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:05, Bengaluru
Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
PRS
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1