Karnataka High Court
Sri Nagaraju vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGAL URU
DATED THIS THE 25 T H DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021
BEFOR E
THE HON'BLE MR . JUSTICE SREEN IVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1949 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
Sri Nagaraju,
Aged Major,
Residing at Whitefield,
K.R .Puram Hobli,
Bengaluru East Taluk,
Bengaluru-560036.
...Petitioner
(By Sri Dayanand Hiremath, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
Police Inspector,
BMTF Police Station,
Bengaluru,
Represented by
State Public Prosecutor,
High Court B uilding,
Bengaluru-560001.
2. Sri A.R.Annaiah,
Aged about 36 years,
S/o Maddurappa,
State President,
Karnataka Rajya Badavara
Hitarakshana Vedhike (R),
1 s t Main Road, Ambedkar Nagar,
White Field, Bengaluru-56.
:: 2 ::
3. The Tahsildar,
Office of the Tahsildar,
Bengaluru East Taluk,
K.R.Puram, Bengaluru-560036.
...Respondents
(By Sri K.S.Abhijith, HCGP for R1 & R3;
Sri B .N.Puttalingaiah, Advocate for R2-Absent)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482
of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the FIR in Criminal Case
against the petitioner for the offences punishable
under Section 192(A) and 192(B) of K.L.R . Act
registered by the respondent No.1 in CR.No.8/2014,
subsequently charge sheet filed in C.C.No.12494/2014
before the C.M.M., subsequently said court by its
order dated 31.05.2017 has transferred the
C.C.No.12494/2014 to Court Hall No.2, in the court of
the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special
Court, Bengaluru which is presently numbered as
L.G.C.(G) NO.926/2017 on the basis of the complaint
lodged by the 2 n d respondent and allow the petition.
This Criminal Petition coming on for admission
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3. Counsel for respondent No.2 is absent.
:: 3 ::
2. On 31.01.2014, the first respondent police registered an FIR in Crime No.8/2014 at the instance of the second respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 192(a) and 192(b) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act ('Act' for short) on the allegations that the petitioner and some others had unauthorizedly occupied the government land and Rajakaluve situated in Sy.No.11/2 and 11/3 of Whitefield village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk and constructed apartments and houses. The second respondent sought action against the petitioner and others. Consequently, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.8/2014 and then the police officer filed the charge sheet. The petitioner has sought to quash the charge sheet under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
3. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government :: 4 ::
Pleader for respondents 2 and 3 and on perusing the documents, it appears that the police officer straight away took action on the basis of the complaint made by the second respondent, A.R.Annaiah. Learned High Court Government Pleader refers to a complaint made by the Tahsildar on 04.12.2013 to the Additional Director General of Police about the encroachment in the said survey number lands. But on perusal of Section 192(A) of the Act, it becomes clear that the Judicial Magistrate First Class can try an offence punishable under Section 192(A) of the Act. But what is to be stated is that whenever there is a complaint with regard to occupying a government land, the concerned revenue officer must hold an enquiry in order to ascertain whether there is encroachment on or occupation of the government property. While conducting such enquiry, the concerned persons must be heard. This Court in the case of SMT. LALITHA SASTRY :: 5 ::
VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DPAL AND ORS [ILR 2008 KAR 4520], it is clearly held that the Tahsildar is required to give an opportunity to the alleged encroachers before taking any action. It appears that the concerned parties have not been heard. Therefore the charge sheet filed by the police officer straight away on the complaint made by the second respondent A.R.Annaiah is illegal and it cannot be sustained. Hence the petitioner has made out a ground for interference under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly the following:
ORDER Petition is allowed.
Proceedings in C.C.No.12494/2014 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, now transferred and pending in the Special Court constituted under the Karnataka Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act and numbered as LGC (G) No.926/2017 is quashed.
:: 6 ::
Liberty is granted to the concerned authority to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kmv/-