Karnataka High Court
Sri. Parameshwarappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2022
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
WRIT PETITION NO. 18483 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. PARAMESHWARAPPA
S/O KENCHAPPA LATTAPPARA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
EX KUMBALURU GRAMA PANCHAYAT PDO
HARIHARA TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 330
NOW R/AT DH ROAD
BHANUVALLI VILLAGE
HARIHARA TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 516
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
REP. BY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S.BUILDING
AMBEDKAR VEEDI
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE TAHASILDAR
HARIHARA TALUK, HARIHARA
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 530
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
MALEBENNURU POLICE STATOIN,
MALEBENNURU HARIHARA TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 530
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ROHITH.B.J., ADVOCATE)
2
THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH PROCEEDINGS IN CASE BEARING CRIME
NO.84/2020, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 447 IPC AND
SECTION 3 OF KARNATAKA PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO
PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT 1984, SECTION 3 AND 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011
SECTION 192(A) AND (B) OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT
1964 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, REGISTERED BY THE R3,
REGISTERED BY THE MALEBENNURU POLICE STATION,
HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, REGISTERED ON
THE COMPLAINT OF THE R2, THE TAHASILDAR, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARIHARA VIDE
ANNEXURE-B DTD 10.08.20 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER
ONLY AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash proceedings in Crime No.84/2020, Malebennur Police Station, Harihara Taluk, Davanagere District for the offence punishable under Section 447 of IPC and Section 3 of the Karnataka Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act, 1984, Section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, Section 3 and 4 of Karnataka land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 and section 192(B) of Karnataka Land Revenue Amendment Act, 2007. 3
2. Heard the arguments of Sri.V.B.Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rohith.B.J., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents- State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent No.2-Tashildar lodged a complaint with respondent No.3-Police on 10.08.2020 alleging that Basaveshwara temple, Kumbaluru Village, Harihara Taluk, Davanagere District is said to be encroached the Government land and to an extent of 5.45 guntas in Sy.No.110/1 measuring 3.18 guntas, has been encroached by accused No.1-petitioner as Convener who is also said to be a PDO of Kumbaluru grama Panchayat, and without verifying the documents he has made the Khatha in the name of Accused No.3. Therefore, FIR which came to be registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already quashed the order against accused Nos.2 and 3 in writ petition No.13209/2020 (GM-RES) vide order dated 15.06.2022. In this petition Government official i.e., the Tahasildar has filed the complaint without issuance of notice to the petitioners to verify the documents. Therefore, there is violation of the ratio laid down in the judgment of this Court in the case of 4 Shiva Kumar -vs- State of Karnataka and another reported in W.P.No.49183/2012.
5. Per contra learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has objected the discussion of quashing the said writ petition.
6. Having heard the arguments, it is seen that accused No.2 is said to be the Temple/committee as convener is said to have sold the vacant property to accused No.3. Tahasildar has filed the complaint and registration of the FIR iswithout issuance of any notice as imposed under Section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. In support of the case, reliance is placed on the decision of the Co-ordinate bench of this Court, in the case of Shiva Kumar K.M. (supra) wherein this Court has quashed the criminal proceedings. The relevant paragraphs is extracted below:
"5. The coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shiva Kumar K.M. (supra) at paras 15 and 17 has held as under:
15. Even with regard to the alleged offences under the provisions of the KMC Act, it is necessary to follow the due procedure as aid down under Section 5 192A of the KLR Act and then only respondent No.1 State can come to the conclusion that whether really offences alleged under the provisions of the KLR Act and the KMC Act have been committed or not with regard to the allegation of encroachment on the public land. Without doing such exercise and only on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint, it cannot be said that such offences have been committed.
16......
17. In view of the provisions under section 192A of the KLR Act so also the government circular issued under the provisions of Section 192A of the KLR Act, there is a bar to the BMTF to register the FIRs and to take up investigation in the matter. Therefore, when there is a clear bar under the said provisions so also the government circular, it is not necessary to refer to the other merits of the case."
7. In view of quashing of the FIR as against accused Nos.2 and 3, the petitioner-PDO has acted in accordance with law and the offence committed during discharge of his official duty. Therefore, in view of the quashing of the FIR against 6 co-accused, this petitioner-accused No.1 is also entitled for same relief.
ORDER Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned FIR in Crime No.84/2020 registered by Mallebennur Police is hereby quashed. However, liberty is reserved to respondent No.2 to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMC