Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Santosh S/o Mahaveer Mangasuli, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad, seeking quashing of the cognizance taken by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in Special Case No.186/2022. The case arose out of Crime No.92/2022 registered at Harugeri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323, 384, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) and the Amendment Act, 2015. The petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.1. The primary contention of the petitioner was that the Special Court took cognizance of the offences under the SC/ST Act without obtaining the mandatory sanction under Section 18A of the said Act. Section 18A(2) of the SC/ST Act mandates that no court shall take cognizance of any offence under the Act without a preliminary inquiry or a police report. The petitioner argued that in the absence of such sanction, the cognizance was illegal and the entire proceedings were an abuse of the process of law. The State, represented by the High Court Government Pleader, opposed the petition. The High Court, after hearing both sides, examined the provisions of Section 18A of the SC/ST Act. The court noted that the provision was inserted by the Amendment Act of 2015 and makes it mandatory for the court to conduct a preliminary inquiry or receive a police report before taking cognizance. In the present case, the Special Court had taken cognizance without any such inquiry or report. The court held that the cognizance was without jurisdiction and void ab initio. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, quashed the cognizance order dated 18.08.2022, and the entire proceedings in Spl.C.No.186/2022 insofar as the petitioner was concerned. The court clarified that this order would not preclude the authorities from initiating fresh proceedings in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - The petitioner sought quashing of cognizance and entire proceedings in Spl.C.No.186/2022 for offences under IPC and SC/ST Act on the ground that no sanction under Section 18A of the SC/ST Act was obtained before taking cognizance. Held that the mandatory requirement of Section 18A(2) of the SC/ST Act, which mandates a preliminary inquiry or police report before taking cognizance, was not complied with, rendering the cognizance illegal and liable to be quashed. (Paras 1-10) B) SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 18A - Mandatory Preliminary Inquiry - The court held that Section 18A(2) of the SC/ST Act requires that no cognizance shall be taken without a preliminary inquiry or a police report. In the absence of such inquiry or report, the cognizance taken by the Special Court is without jurisdiction and void. (Paras 5-8) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - The High Court, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, quashed the cognizance order and the entire proceedings in Spl.C.No.186/2022 as the same amounted to an abuse of process of law. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cognizance taken by the Special Court for offences under the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 without prior sanction under Section 18A of the Act is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The cognizance taken by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Spl.C.No.186/2022 dated 18.08.2022 and the entire proceedings in the said case insofar as the petitioner/accused No.1 is concerned, are quashed. Liberty is reserved to the authorities to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Quashing of criminal proceedings
- Lack of sanction under Section 18A of SC/ST Act
- Mandatory preliminary inquiry
- Cognizance without sanction is void
- Abuse of process of court
