Dismissed

Sri Santhosh Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Jun 2012CRL.P/168/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court examined whether the proceedings for alleged forest offences were a fit case for quashing. Finding the case registrated before the No Objection Certificate was issued and noting the construction on forest land, the Court held it was not a fit case for quashing and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as the case was not found to be a fit case for quashing.

Sri Santhosh Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF JUNE 2012

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBHASH B ADI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.168 OF 2012

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.SANTHOSH KUMAR S/O AGED ABOUT YEARS CHIEF OFFICER TOWN PANCHAYATH JOG-KARGAL, SHIMOGA DIST. … PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.B.J.MAHESH, ADV. FOR EESH & EESH ASSTS., ADVS.)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY RANGE FOREST OFFICER KARGAL RANGE SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT … RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI.VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HCGP)

¶13

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to release the petitioner on bail in C.C. No.87/11 on the file of C.J. (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Sagar arising out of Crime No.36/07-08 for the offence punishable under Section 24(g.g) of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and Section 2 of Forest Reservation Act, 1980 in so far as petitioner is concerned.

¶14

This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Petitioner is accused No.22. Case was registered against him and others in Forest Offence No.36/2007-08 for the offence punishable under Section 24(g)(g) of the Karnataka Forest Act and Rules 42 and 43 of the Karnataka Forest Rules and Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

¶18

The allegation is that the petitioner had issued NOC dated 23.1.2008 for availing the power sanctioned to a premise bearing No.2246. When the forest officials found that the construction on a property bearing No.2246 was part of Sy.No.14 a reservation forest area, in this regard, they had informed the concerned authorities not to accord any sanction of license . When this fact came to the notice of the petitioner, the petitioner cancelled the same vide communication dated 9.4.2008.

¶19

It is not in dispute that the case was registered against the petitioner much prior to the issue of the no objection certificate. It is only when the Tahsildar informed the petitioner to cancel, he has cancelled and when the no

¶20

¶21

objection was granted, there was a case pending against other accused, who had constructed the building in the forest land. Considering the nature of allegation, I find that it is not a fit case for quashing the proceedings.

¶22

Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

¶23

Sd/JUDGE

¶24

Sri Santhosh Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Santhosh Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem Pasha @ Saleem @ Padri Vs State of Karnataka

Zabeer Baig Vs Smt. Najiya Anjum

L Balasubramaniam Vs State of Karnataka

Chikkadasappa Vs Venkateshababu

Faisal Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka by

A Ramakrishnappa Vs State of Karnataka