IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA WRIT PETITION Nos.65246-65247/2016 BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Harshit K.L., S/o. Lakshme Gowda K.M., 26 years, Resident of “SRI SADANA”, 4th Cross, Vishveshwariah Extension, Salagame Road, Hassan – 573 201.
2. Sri. Manjunath G, S/o. Govindappa, 23 years, Mechanic II Grade, O & M Division, MESCOM, Jayapura, Taluk: Koppa – 577 126, District : Chikkamagalur …Petitioners (By Sri. Veeranna G. Tigadi, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Rep. by Regional Forest Officer, Range office, Koppa Range, Koppa District: Chikkamagalur, Rep. by SPP, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Smt. Hamsavi R., Age Major, Father name not known, Range Forest Officer, Koppa Range, Koppa – 577 126, Dist : Chikkamagalur ...Respondents (By Sri. I.S.Pramod Chandra, SPP-II for R1) These writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the charge sheet at Annexure-C dated 05.01.2016 and proceedings in Special Case No.38/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 50 and 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, Section 29 of Indian Electricity Act, 1956, read with Rule 12(1) and 74(1) of Central Electricity Authority Act, 2010 and Section 429 of Indian Penal code, 1860, pending on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chickmagalur at Annexure-D and etc., These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner No.1 is the Assistant Engineer and petitioner No.2 is the Mechanic II Grade in MESCOM, Mangalore. The case in Crime No.39/2015 came to be registered against the petitioners based on the complaint lodged by the Range Forest Officer, Koppa Range, alleging that on account of the negligence of petitioners, a live wire was allowed to dangle endangering the lives of the public; as a result, a cow and a deer died due to electrocution.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset would submit that both the petitioners are public servants and hence the prosecution of the petitioners without prior sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is legally untenable. He further submits that the Investigating Agency had infact sought for sanction for the prosecution of petitioners by making necessary application to the competent Authority and the same is refused by the competent Authority as evidenced from the order dated 04.04.2016 passed by the Managing Director, MESCOM, Mangalore. The same is produced along with the charge- sheet. Hence, he submits that the Court is disabled from taking cognizance of the alleged offence and therefore the prosecution of the petitioners is an abuse of the process of Court and is liable to be quashed at the hands of this Court.
3. The learned State Public Prosecutor-II does not dispute the fact that after completing the investigation, an application was made to the competent Authority along with the charge-sheet papers seeking sanction for the prosecution of the petitioners. But, the same having been refused by the competent authority, in view of the bar contained in Section 197 of Cr.P.C., the Courts are disabled from taking cognizance of the alleged offence.
4. Having regard to these facts, the prosecution of the petitioners for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 50 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Section 29 of Indian Electricity Act, 1956, Rule 12(1) and 74(1) of the Central Electricity Authority Act, 2010 and Section 429 of IPC, 1860, cannot be sustained.
Accordingly, writ Petitions are allowed. The proceedings pending on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikamagalur, in Special Case No.38/2016 are quashed.
SV/-
Sd/- JUDGE