Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sarjan Realities Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 November, 2022

Author: Hemant Chandangoudar

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                                            -1-




                                                   CRL.P No. 103144 of 2022

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                        DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                                          BEFORE
                    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
                        CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103144 OF 2022 (482)


                   BETWEEN:

                   SARJAN REALITIES PVT. LTD.,
                   A COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED
                   UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
                   COMPANIES ACT, 1956
                   AND REGISTEREED
                   WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
                   MAHARASHTRA,
                   AT PUNE, 3RD FLOOR,
                   SAI HIRA MUNDWA ROAD,
                   PUNE 411036
                   AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED
                   OFFICE AT GODREJ MILLENNIUM
                   5TH FLOOR,
                   9TH KOREGAON PARK ROAD,
                   PUNE-411001 REPRESENTED BY ITS
                   AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
                   MR. VINAYA KUMAR L.
                   S/O LEPAKSHAPPA R.
Digitally signed
by SUJATA
SUBHASH
                   AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
PAMMAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA,
                   R/O HARAPANAHALLI,
DHARWAD
BENCH,
DHARWAD.           TQ. HARAPANAHALLI,
                   DIST. VIJAYANAGAR.

                                                              ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI G. I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                        BY ITS SECRETARY TO
                        DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
                               -2-




                                     CRL.P No. 103144 of 2022

     VIDHANA VEEDHI
     BENGALURU -01.

2.   THE DEPUTY RANGE FOREST OFFICER
     KUNCHUGUR BEAT,
     HYARADE (HERADA) SECTION
     HARAPANAHALLI RANGE,
     DAVANAGERE DIVISION,
     DIST. VIJAYANAGAR.

3.   THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER
     HARAPANAHALLI RANGE,
     HARAPANAHALLI,
     TQ. AND DIST. VIJAYANAGAR.

                                                   ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V. S. KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE)


      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS OF CRIMINAL
PETITION   SEEKING      FOR   QUASHING       OF     THE    ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS OF CR.NO.53/2022-23 (FOC NO.53/2022-23)
KUNCHUGUR       BEAT,     HYARADE         (HERADA)        SECTION,
HARAPANAHALLI RANGE, DAVANAGERE DIVISION, FOR THE
ALLEGED    OFFENCES     U/S   33,   62,   82(B),    104   OF   THE
KARNATAKA FOREST ACT AND RULE 25 AND 43 OF THE
FOREST RULES, PENDING ON THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DVN) AND
JMFC, HARAPANAHALLI, IN SO FOR AS PETITIONER/ACCUSED
IS CONCERNED.


      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                     -3-




                                          CRL.P No. 103144 of 2022

                              ORDER

The FIR is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 33, 62, 82(B), 104 of the Karnataka Forest Act and Rules 25 and 43 of the Forest Rules alleging that, the petitioner-accused company has occupied forest land and established wind mill for generating power. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the FIR registered by the Deputy Range Forest Officer is one without authority of law, since Section 62(a) of the Forest Act, specifies that the FIR can be registered and the offence can be investigated only by the Range Forest Officer not only by an officer not only the rank of range forest officer. He further submits that the directors of the company not having been arraigned as an accused the petitioner cannot be held vicariously guilty along with the directors as specifies under Section 82(B) of the Act.

3. He further submits that an agreement is executed by the Government of Karnataka permitting the petitioner to -4- CRL.P No. 103144 of 2022 set up a wind mill for generating power and as such the petitioner cannot said to have occupied Government land.

4. On the other hand, learned HCGP appearing for the State submits that the petitioner-complainant having set up wind mill after occupying the Government land for generating electricity has committed the aforesaid offences and the registration of the FIR does not warrant any interference.

5. I have examined the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

6. Admittedly, there is no declaration that the subject land is a forest land, and the Government having executed an agreement permitting the petitioner to set up a Wind Mill, the allegation that the petitioner has occupied forest land is without any substances.

7. The FIR registered by Deputy Range Officer is one without authority of law, since the officer competent to investigate is an officer not below the rank of Range Forest Officer as specified under Section 62(a) of the Karnataka Forest Act.

-5-

CRL.P No. 103144 of 2022

8. In view of the proceedings analyses, the continuation of the investigation by the Deputy Range Forest Officer is one without authority of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER
a) This Criminal Petition is allowed.
b) The impugned FOC No.53/2022-23 registered by the Deputy range forest officer, Kunchugur beat, Hyarade (Herada) Section, Harapanahalli Range, Davanagere Division for the alleged offences under Sections 33, 62, 82(B), 104 of the Karnataka Forest Act and Rule 25 and 43 of the Forest Rules is hereby quashed.
c) It is needless to state that, if the respondent has seized any material belonging to the petitioner, the same to be released to the petitioner in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE SSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 170