MANJUNATHA RAO K. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.P.No.1947/2022 is filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the FIR registered against the petitioner by Mandya West Police Station in Crime No.27/2022 for the alleged offence punishable under Ss. 196, 197, 198, 199, 420, 464, 467, 468, 469, 471, 499, 503 of IPC and Ss. 3 (1)(q), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(u) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment Act, 2015) (herein after referred SC&ST (POA) Act pending on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Court, Mandya in PCR No.2/2022 referring the case under Sec. 156 (3) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for both the accused and learned HCGP for the State and respondent No.2/party-in-person. In Crl.P.No. 1947/2022

(3.) The case of the prosecution is it is alleged that the petitioner was posted as per Superintendent of Post Office, Mandya Division Mandya (Adhoc) on 4/9/2020. The adhoc arrangement was terminated on 2/9/2021 and he was transferred to Kodagu Division as Assistant Superintendent of Post Office. Once again on 15/9/2021 he was posted as Superintendent of Post Office Mandya Division and he was responsible for day to day activities. The respondent No.2 was appointed as Postal Assistant in Mandya Division on 12/7/1999 and he has passed accountant examination and joined as Accountant at Srirangapatna Head Office on 10/6/2010 and later was transferred to Mandya Head Post Office and appointed as Accountant in Mandya Division. The petitioner is appointing and controlling authority for 'C' group employees. In terms of Rule 174 and 179 of Postal Manual Volume III read with DOPT official Memorandum bearing NO.21011/1/2005-Estt(A)(Petition-II) the official memorandum dtd. 14/5/2009. The petitioner maintains the APAR of the employees of the department. The complainant prepared an appeal to the Director of Postal Services, South Karnataka Region, against the adverse remarks made by the petitioner in his Annual Performance and Assessment Report, which was turned down by the non-speaking order. As such, the complainant decided to approach appropriate court and wanted to collect the concerned documents. Later, on 29/10/2021 inter-alia sought information about the copies of APAR documents with office notes to the Director of Postal Service in connection with adverse entries in APAR for the year 2018- 19, 2019-20, 2020-21 which included parawise remarks report of the accused, addressed to the Director Postal Service, Bangalore. The accused being Central Public Information Officer directed the complainant to deposit Rs.14.00 towards supply of documents and he has credited the same and accused supplied the information to the complainant which is legible. In the meanwhile, the complainant internally sought similar information from the Post Master General South Region, Bangalore through RTI application on 28/12/2021. There is a parawise remarks report submitted by the accused on the appeal of the complainant, addressed to the Director of Postal Service South Karnataka. Accordingly, the information was supplied on 29/1/2022/13/2/2022. The complainant reproducing the parawise remarks, where the accused on the appeal of the complainant, against his adverse entries in APAR report addressed to the Director Postal Service which was numbered as Steno/Appeal/APAR/Dlgs dtd. 5/8/2021 wherein it is mentioned as below:-