Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33777 (KAR)

S LEPAKSHA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/481/2020 · 2025-04-17

Mohammad Nawaz

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 481 OF 2020 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: S. LEPAKSHA, S/O SH. SIDDAIAH, AGED 58 YEARS, DIRECTOR, M/S. INDIAN BLOCKS PVT. LIMITED, NO.11/2, IBH PRAKSHANA, 2ND FLOOR, NEW JH COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, 5TH MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 009. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NITHIN GOWDA K.C, ADOCATE FOR SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR.P, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY RANGE FOREST OFFICER, KANKAPURA, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DR B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20.04.2019 IN FOC NO.93/2006-07 NOW C.C.NO.364/2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KANAKAPURA THEREBY ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT/PROSECUTION UNDER SEC.473 OF CODE AND TO TAKE COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 104 OF THE FOREST ACT AND RULE 165 OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST RULE FOR THE ALLEGED CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 144 OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST RULE AND TO REGISTER CRIMINAL CASE AND ISSUE SUMMONS, AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE CRL.P. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner is seeking to quash the order dated 20.04.2019 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C at Kanakapura in FOC.No.93/2006-07. 2. It is alleged that the petitioner has carried on quarry activities illegally in the land bearing Sy.No.145, within 100 meters of the boundary of Ramadevara Betta - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 Reserve Forest and thereby committed offences under Rules 41(2) of Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 read with Section 104 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963. 3. FIR was registered in FOC.No.93/2006-07 on 19.09.2006 on a complaint lodged by the Range Forest Officer, Kanakapura range. 4. A charge sheet came to be filed against one Indian Blocks Private Limited, No.11/2, 2nd Floor, IBH Prakashana, New J.H Commercial Complex, 5th Main road, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru-560009, for contravention of the provisions of Rules 41(2), 144 of Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969, Section 104 of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and Sections 4(1)(1/a), 21(1), 24(4) and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. 5. Filing of charge sheet and taking of cognizance was challenged by M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited, before this Court in Crl.P.643/2014, on the ground that offences being non-cognizable in nature, mandatory provisions under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C was not - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 followed. This Court was pleased to quash the charge sheet, however, reserved liberty to the respondent to take necessary orders from the jurisdictional Magistrate and to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 6. Consequent to passing of the above orders, after taking permission from the learned Magistrate, investigation was conducted and charge sheet was filed on 30.11.2018 against the petitioner in the capacity as a director of M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited for violation of rules 41(2), 144 of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 and Section 104 of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and Section 4 and 21(1)(4)(5), 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. 7. An application was filed by the prosecution under Section 473 of Cr.P.C to condone the delay in filing charge sheet and taking cognizance of the offences. The learned Magistrate vide impugned order dated 20.04.2019 was pleased to condone the delay and cognizance for offences punishable under Section 104 of the Karnataka Forest Act - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 and rule 165 of the Karnataka Forest rules for contravention of rule 144 was taken. 8. It is not in dispute that the allegation of conducting illegally quarry activities relates to the year 2006. The allegations are that within 100 meters distance from the boundary of Ramadevara Betta Reserve Forest, accused has conducted certain quarry activities illegally. The petitioner was not arraigned as accused when the FIR was registered, on the other hand one M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited was arraigned as an accused. It is no where stated in the FIR registered in the year 2006 that the petitioner was the director of the said M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited. 9. This Court quashed the proceedings vide order dated 06.02.2014, however reserved liberty to the respondent/police to take necessary orders from the jurisdictional Magistrate and to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. However, the charge sheet was filed on 30.11.2018, wherein the petitioner, for the first time, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 was arraigned as an accused representing M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited. The learned Magistrate has found that the cognizance for violation of the provisions under the MMDR Act and KMMC rules could not have been taken as there was no complaint filed by the competent person. It is rightly observed that the police/forest officials have no power under MM(DR) Act to file a final report for the offences thereunder. 10. Insofar as the offences under the Forest Act and rules are concerned, this Court finds that initially there was no case registered against the petitioner but against one M/s. Indian Blocks Private Limited. Petitioner was not at all arraigned as an accused in the capacity as a Director of M/s.Indian Blocks Private Limited. For the said reason and considering the inordinate delay in filing the charge sheet, this Court is of the view that the proceedings pending against the petitioner is an abuse of process of the Court. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15922 CRL.P No. 481 of 2020 11. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The entire proceedings in FOC.No.93/2006-07 pending before the Court of Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C at Kanakapura (CC.No.364/2019) are quashed. iii. I.A.No.1/2019 is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 CT: BHK