Allowed

Sri.Shivakumar D v. the State by Kadugodi Police

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2023WP/3679/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought to quash the FIR and proceedings under Sections 192(A) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Sections 447, 465, 468, 471 of the IPC. The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the proceedings against the petitioner on the ground that the specific legal issues were already settled by judgments of coordinate benches.

What did the court decide?

The FIR dated 08-02-2023 and all further proceedings in Crime No.28 of 2023, shall stand quashed qua the petitioner.

Sri.Shivakumar D Vs the State by Kadugodi Police — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3679 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SRI SHIVAKUMAR D, S/O LATE DODDAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS WORKING AS SENIOR SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE BY KADUGODI POLICE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE WHITEFIELD SUB DIVISION BENGALURU – 560 067.

¶14

THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE EAST TALUK K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶19

THE CODE OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED COMPLAINT DATED 08/02/2023 (ANNEXURE-D) AND IMPUGNED FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 08/02/2023 (ANNEXURE-E).

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioner is before this Court calling in question the FIR dated 08-02-2023 and further proceedings in Crime No.28 of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 192(A)(1), 192(A)(2)(3)(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and Sections 447, 465, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

¶23

Heard Sri. Satish K., learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri. Mahesh Shetty, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶24

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the coordinate Benches of this Court in the case of LALITHA SASTRY V. STATE OF KARNATAKA¹ and in the case of

¶25

1 ILR 2008 KAR 4520

¶26

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶28

S.RAMANNA V. STATE BY NELAMANGALA POLICE in

¶29

Crl.P.No.4662 of 2008 disposed on 11-06-2009.

¶30

Learned High Court Government Pleader would admit

¶31

the position on the issue being covered by the aforesaid judgments.

¶32

The co-ordinate bench in the case of LALITHA SASTRI (supra) has held as follows:

¶33

“….

¶34

2. The main grievance of the petitioners in all these cases is, they are in occupation of the disputed land in question in their own right. It is not a Government land. They have not encroached upon any portion of the Government land. In fact some of them are purchasers of such lands. They are put in possession by their vendors, on the basis of documents handed over to them at the time of purchase. They are not aware of the factual position and may be innocent also. In spite of the same these proceedings are initiated against them as if they have encroached the Government land which is made an offence now by amendment of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act by introducing Section 192A. Some of them contend if any survey had been conducted with any notice to them and if it was shown to them that the land which is in their occupation or any portion of it is a Government land, they would have surrendered the said land. However, without giving any such opportunity, without conducting any survey in their presence, on the basis of Mahazars conducted, on the basis of documents to which they are not parties, a complaint is lodged by the Tahsildar with the jurisdictional police who in turn has

¶35

¶36

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶37

initiated criminal proceedings and charge sheets are filed. Therefore, they seek for quashing of the entire proceedings.

¶38

3. After notice the Government entered appearance and supported their action. After hearing the matter at length when it was suggested to the Government that an opportunity ought to have been given to these petitioners and persons who are similarly placed, who if they are convinced that they are in occupation of a Government land, without any intention of entering upon the said land or continued to occupy the said land, they may voluntarily give up such possession. Time was taken to consider whether a provision could be made to adjudicate these aspects before initiation of proceedings. Today a memo is filed on behalf of the Government enclosing a circular dated 8.9.2008. The said circular reads as under:—

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶41

4. From the aforesaid circular it is clear the Government is now convinced that an opportunity should be given to all those alleged encroachers of Government land before any proceedings are initiated under Section 192 A of the Act. In fact it stipulates a procedure under which a show cause notice is to be given calling upon those alleged encroachers to file their objections within 15 days. If no objections are received authorities are called

¶42

¶43

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶44

upon to visit the spot, conduct a Mahazar in the presence of the villagers, obtain their signatures and thereafter to initiate criminal proceedings if they are satisfied that there is encroachment. In the event of alleged encroachers producing documents to examine the same and only in the event of the said documents are found to be fabricated or duplicate, to initiate proceedings under Section 192A of the Act. In fact the said procedure contemplated by the Government satisfy the requirement of principles of natural justice, an opportunity is given to these persons to realise whether they have occupied a Government land and if they are convinced to surrender possession to avoid criminal prosecution. That would meet the ends of justice. In that view of the matter, as the criminal prosecution is launched against all these petitioners without affording an opportunity to have their say and in the light of the circular which is passed by the Government, these proceedings cannot be sustained.”

¶45

The co-ordinate Bench in the case of S.RAMANNA

¶46

(supra) has held as follows:

¶47

“…. ….

¶48

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as far as the petitioner is concerned, he has to verify whether the documents produced are bogus documents or not, whether the vendor has clear title deed to the property, whether the transfer is by impersonating the real owner and whether the transfer is in accordance with law? There is no reference under the sale deed that there is transfer of non-agricultural land without conversion order nor there is any allegation that this authority has got anything to do with the conversion order or non-conversion.

¶49

4. Section 192-A refers to Clause (5) which deals with sale of an agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes without getting such land converted or without getting approval of the competent authority. Section 192 (B) relates to abetment of offense. From the

¶50

¶51

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶52

registered sale deed produced in this case, it shows that a small portion of agricultural land has been sold. No doubt, the vendor might be circumventing the provisions of Land Revenue Act by selling the land in piece meal. But that does not constitute an offence as far as the Subregistrar is concerned. Along with the sale deed, the vendor has produced the certificate of the purchaser to show that the purchaser is an agriculturist and has also obtained necessary permission under the relevant law. If that is so, as far as this petitioner is concerned, there is no violation of Section 192(A) or 192(B) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The complaint dated 19.9.2008 by the Tahsildar/Executive Magistrate Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore and the First Information Report dated 15.10.2008 in Crime No.962/2008 on the file of the JMFC Nelamangala insofar as the petitioner is concerned are quashed.”

¶53

In the light of the issue standing covered by the

¶54

aforesaid judgments passed by the co-ordinate Benches on all its fours, the present petition deserves to succeed. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

(i) Writ Petition is allowed.

¶57

¶58

NC: 2023:KHC:20515 WP No. 3679 of 2023

¶59

(ii) The FIR dated 08-02-2023 and all further proceedings taken thereto in Crime No.28 of 2023, shall stand quashed qua the petitioner.

¶60

Sd/JUDGE

¶61