Surendra Gundu Ugare Vs the State of Karnataka

SURENDRA GUNDU UGARE, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE & ENVIRONMENTALIST, R/O. SAMRUDDHI HAPPY HOMES, F-02, KULKARNI LAYOUT, RAMATHEERTHA NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. VIJAY K. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, DHARWAD DIVISION, DHARWAD, FOREST DEPARTMENT, DHARWAD DISTRICT, R/BY. ADDITIONAL STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE FIR IN FIR REG.NO.281/2024 (FOC NO.08/2024-25) FOR THE OFFENCE U/S.24c(ii) OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-II COURT, DHARWAD IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED) IS CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

¶26

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) praying to quash the proceedings in FIR Reg.No.281/2024 (FOC No.08/2024-25) for the offences punishable under Section 24c(ii) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, on the file of the learned JMFC-II Court, Dharwad, insofar as petitioner is concerned.

¶27

The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

¶28

On 24.05.2024, the respondent–Range Forest Officer, Dharwad, lodged a complaint against the

¶29

petitioner, alleging that the petitioner has illegally trespassed into the forest and without permission, he has

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶31

3 -

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

taken photographs and videos graphs of the forest area, coming under the jurisdiction of the Kalakeri Beat, Kalakeri Section, Dharwad Range, Dharwad Division. Hence, he lodged a complaint. This led to registration of FIR and investigation. Taking exceptions to the same, the petitioner has filed this petition to quash the FIR.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no prima facie case made out against the petitioner. The petitioner is a practicing advocate in Belagavi as well as in Raibag, and the incident occurred on 24.05.2024. On that day, the petitioner had appeared before the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag, and also filed vakalath along with bail application in Raibag P.S. Crime No.261/2022 (C.C.No.2409/2023). Hence, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case.

¶35

The learned counsel for the petitioner further

¶36

contended that the petitioner is also an Environmentalist

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

and he has filed a complaint before the Karnataka Lokayukta, against the officials of the Forest Department in Dharwad Division, against one Parashuramam Manakura, Deputy Range Forest Officer, Kalakeri Section, Pradeep Pawar, the Range Forest Officer, Dharwad Range, Ramalingappa Uppar, the Range Forest, Dharwad, Parimala Hulagannavara-Assistant Conservator of Forest, Dharwad Sub-Division; and Sonal Vrusti-IFS, the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Dharwad Division, alleging misappropriation of Government funds with regard to the work of “Route Stock” project coming under Kalakeri Section of Dharwad Division. Therefore, to wreak vengeance against the petitioner, the first informant lodged a false complaint.

¶40

Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State contended that the petition is not at all it is submitted that maintainable in the eyes of law and on facts. Further, the petitioner entered the forest area, took

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

video clips and sent it in a Whatsapp group. The video clip was about “Kalakeri Route Stock” project works and was allegatory video clip. Now, the petitioner has taken plea of alibi, which cannot be considered under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the most it has to be taken during trial. Hence she prayed to reject the petition.

¶44

Perused the materials available on record.

¶45

As per the case of the prosecution, on 24.05.2024, the petitioner entered the forest area, where he took the photographs and video graphs of the forest area, without the permission of the Forest Department.

¶46

From perusal of the materials available on record, the video clip was about “Kalakeri Route Stock” project works and was allegatory video clip. The still shots of video clips, it appears that he has made some defamatory statement against forest officials.

¶47

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

As per the material placed on record, on 11.05.2024, a person make video graphed and photo graphed in the Kalakeri Reserve Forest, accompanied with by former Beat forester Sri.Shivanand Kodikoppa. It appears to be the same person who is appearing in the video clip.

¶50

Further, Sri.Annappa Goravanakolla, Kalakeri,

¶51

who is the plantation watcher on daily wages, a gave statement that the petitioner entered the forest area and took various photo graphs and video clips about the “Route Stock” project at kalakeri. Now, the petitioner is disputing the question of fact and also taken the contention that on the date of alleged offence, he was in Court representing criminal cases, thus, he has taken “ plea of alibi ”. Disputing question of fact cannot be examined under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and also plea of alibi cannot be taken under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, at the most, it can be raised in a trial. Hence, at this

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8470 CRL.P No. 102111 of 2024

¶53