IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5331 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
SMT RAMAKKA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS W/O S RAMACHANDRA REDDY NO 38 YARANDAHALLI VILLAGE ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560099.
(BY SRI: NAVEEN TAO, FOR H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BENGALURU METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE CORPORATION BUILDING, N R SQUARE, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU- 560001 2. MR RITESH KUMAR SINGH S/O SHIVA MANGAL SINGH REGIONAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING BENGALURU DIVISION, BENGALURU-37 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R1 R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.77/2014, BENGALURU METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE POLICE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 192(A) AND 192(B) OF KLR ACT, IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned SPP-II for respondent No.1-State.
Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.
2. Criminal action is initiated against the petitioner and other accused based on the complaint lodged by the Regional Commissioner/respondent No.2 alleging that the petitioner herein was granted land bearing Sy.No.155 measuring 3.30 acres (Gomal land) of Hulimangala village, Anekal Taluk, Jigani Hobli, Benguluru Urban District by accused No.2 and others in violation of the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
3. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Smt.Lalitha Sastry’s case, the Regional Commissioner, Bengaluru was required to give an opportunity to the alleged encroacher-the petitioner herein in terms of the circular dated 08.09.2008 bearing No.RD 674 KGB 2008 issued by the Government.
As the impugned proceedings are initiated in violation of the principles laid down in the above decision, the petition is allowed. The FIR registered in Crime No.77/2014 is quashed only in so far as the petitioner is concerned.
The matter is remitted to the Regional Commissioner, Bengaluru to proceed with the matter in accordance with the circular referred to above and in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Smt. Lalita Sastry vs. State of Karnataka represented by its Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Affairs and Legislators and others reported in ILR 2008 Karnataka 4520 and to report compliance within two months.
Sd/- JUDGE *mn/-