IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9712 OF 2016 BETWEEN SRI. N GOPAL S/O LATE NADAKERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS AGRICULTURIST, R/AT NO.208,1ST L MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 072 (BY SMT. MONICA PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RANGE FOREST OFFICER, BANGALORE RANGE, 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560 055 REPRESSENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP) ...PETITIONER …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR BEARING FOC NO.58/2016-17 IN NO.155020 DATED 07.11.2016 PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.C.J. AND J.M.F.C., NELAMANGALA (ANNEXURE –A).
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Though the matter is coming up for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent-State, the mater is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner is the owner of 10 guntas of land in Sy.No.144 and 7.3 guntas of land in Sy.No.145 of Machohalli village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The said lands were originally part of Sy.No.81 of Machohalli village, Dasanapura Hobli.
3. The petitioner submits that one Sri.K.V.Narayanamurthy, Sri. K.V.Keshavamurthy and Sri.K.V. Narasihmamurthy, were cultivating different bits of lands in Sy.No.81 of Machohalli village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. During the year 1977 and 1979, the lands were granted in their favour and Saguvali Chit was issued by the competent authority. Thereafter, land Durasth was done and new Sy.Nos.143, 144 and 145 were allotted to the respective extent of lands. The learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to an order dated 13.01.1995 at Annexure-B to the petition, whereby, the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District permitted the erstwhile owners, i.e., Sri.K.V.Narayanamurthy, Sri. K.V.Keshavamurthy and Sri. K.V. Narasihmamurthy, to sell 4 acres 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.143, 4 acres 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.144 and 4 acres 38 guntas of land in Sy.No.145, in terms of Rule 9(1) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 with certain conditions. Consequent to the said permission being granted by competent authority, the lands were sold by erstwhile owners and the petitioner herein purchased the lands in question under a registered sale deed dated 17.03.2007.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is taken up by surprise by the action of respondent-State representing by the Range Forest Officer, Bangalore Range, in registering an FIR on 07.11.2016, under the provisions of the Karnataka Forest Act and the Karnataka Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The learned counsel for the petitioner while drawing the attention of this Court to the FIR submits that there is absolutely no reason or cause shown in the FIR for registering the crime against the petitioner. It is submitted that the registration of FIR was not preceded by issuance of any show-cause notice to the petitioner. It is in this background that the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR registered against the petitioner be quashed.
5. The learned HCGP appearing for respondent- State, as directed on the earlier occasion, has kept the Assistant Conservator of Forests, (Bangalore-North), Sri.Chikkarajendra D.K, present in the Court. On instructions of the Assistant Conservator of Forests, the learned HCGP submits that the land in question and several hundreds of extents of lands including the land belonging to the petitioner were notified, as Government Plantations under Rule 1 of the Forest Rules, 1878 as notified in the official Gazette on 2nd June, 1896. It is therefore submitted that the lands being Government Plantations notified under the Forest Rule, 1878, the action was initiated against the petitioner under the provisions as stated in the FIR.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for the respondent-State and perused the petition papers.
7. On going through the records, it is evident that the respondent forest officials have not issued any show-cause notice or called upon the petitioner to answer the allegations sought to be imposed upon the petitioner by the respondent-forest officials. On a specific query being raised by this Court to the Assistant Conservator of Forests, the officer admits that no show-cause notice has been issued to the petitioner.
8. No doubt, Section 64A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 provides that any person unauthorisedly occupying any land in reserved forest, district forest, village forest, protected forest and any other land under the control of the Forest Department may, without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against him under any other provision of this Act or any other law for the time being in force, be summarily evicted, by a Forest Officer not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator of Forests.
9. However, the proviso clearly mandates that before evicting a person under this sub-section he shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Sub- Section (3) of 64A further provides an appeal remedy to the aggrieved person to challenge the order of the Forest Officer, before the State Government or such other officer as may be authorised by the State Government to hear on appeal in this behalf. Therefore, the registration of FIR against the petitioner, without granting an opportunity of hearing as provided under the provisions, would follow that the FIR is required to be quashed. Needless to observe that the respondent- forest officials may proceed in accordance with law.
10. For the reasons stated above, the petition is allowed. The FIR in FOC.No.58/2016-17, in No.155020, dated 07.11.2016, pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC., Nelamangala, (Annexure-A), is hereby quashed and set aside.
It is ordered accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE DL