IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 6941/2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI. SATHYA S/O. JOGAIAH AGED 58 YEARS R/O. KODAGAHALLI VILLAGE BASARALU HOBLI MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 130 2. MR. VENU S/O. KANIYAPPA AGED 18 YEARS R/AT. BASARALU VILLAGE AND HOBLI MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 130 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. C. N. KESHAVA MURTHY., ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE BY RANGE FOREST OFFICER MANDYA, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE AT HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HONNAPPA., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENALRGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN FOC NO.6/2019-20 (FIR.NO.444/2019) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S. 33, 62, 84, 85, 86, 80 OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963 AND 25 AND 42 OF KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1969.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners (A1 & A2) and the learned HCGP for the Respondent –State (Range Forest Officer). Perused the records.
2. The complainant, who is the Range Forest Officer of the Range Forest Office, Mandya, has received a credible information on 26.08.2019 that, in the Reserved Forest Land bearing Sy.No.37 situated at Kodagahalli Village, Basaralu Hobli, Mandya Taluk, some persons are cutting and removing trees. Immediately along with panch witnesses, the respondent-Police have visited the said place and found six persons were there and after seeing forest officials, four persons ran away from the spot. The forest officials found 25 pieces of eucalyptus wood and 5 pieces of Red Sandal Wood on the spot which were cut and removed and forest officials have taken said items and seized them. The petitioners (A1 & A2) herein are the two persons who were caught hold and taken into custody. It appears that the charge sheet has not yet filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced RTC extracts pertaining to the forest land bearing Sy. No.37 measuring 4 acres situated at Kodagahalli Village, Mandya Taluk and District, which stands in the name of petitioner No.1. Learned counsel also produced Annexure–E which is the complaint lodged by the 1st petitioner stating that he has been in lawful possession of four acres of forest land and he has been growing various crops. On 24.05.2018, the Range Forest Officer went to that particular land and in order to prevent the petitioner from cultivating the said land, restrained him from continuing the said cultivation and also lifting the eucalyptus roots and other tree logs kept in the said land. Petitioner No.1 has lodged a complaint against the respondent-Forest Range Officer, making such allegations against the respondent. In this context, it is alleged that a false case has been foisted by the respondent against the petitioner No.1 in order to take revenge against him for having lodged a complaint against the respondent before his higher officer etc.
4. Be that as it may. The quantity of sandal wood has not been stated in the complaint, except stating that some sandal wood pieces were present at that particular point of time in order to invoke Section 86 of the Karnataka Forest Act. The Panchnama recorded shows that six persons were present there and out of them four persons were ran away and there is no material with regard to the investigation done so far as those escaped persons are concerned. Nevertheless, the provisions under Section 104-D of the Karnataka Forest Act,1963 imposes responsibility on the Court to find-out whether the accused persons are guilty of the alleged offences or not, at the time of granting or refusing bail.
5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the rivalry between the petitioner No.1 and respondent-Range Forest Officer cannot be easily brushed aside. Therefore, whether the allegations are genuine or not has to be thrashed out during the course of full dressed trial. Considering the nature of allegations and the facts and circumstances of the case, as the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 50 days, and the charge sheet has not yet filed, in my opinion, they are no more required for any further investigation. Therefore, if they are ready and willing to abide by the conditions imposed by this court, they shall be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following, -
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A1 & A2) shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No. FOC-6/2019-20 dated 26.8.2019 registered by the respondent and pending before the Court of JMFC, Mandya District in FIR No.444/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 33, 62, 84, 85, 86, 80 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and under Rules 25 and 42 of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Each of the petitioners shall execute their personal bonds for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against him is disposed of.
vi) The petitioners shall mark their attendance once in 15 days on any Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the final report.
KGR* Sd/-
JUDGE