- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 14518 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT.POORNIMA C.S., W/O RAMESH D.S., AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS WORKING AS TAHSILDAR RESIDING AT VISVESHVARIAH EXTENSION RING ROAD, HASSAN – 573 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI P.P.HEGDE, SR.ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SAMEEKSHA T.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH CHIKKAMAGALURU PS, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577 101. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577 101. …RESPONDENTS BY SRI B.LETHIF, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023 PRAYING TO A. ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 02/2026 DATED 08.04.2026 OF LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS/INVESTIGATION IN THE SAID CASE VIDE ANNEXURE-P. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Petitioner, who is working as the Tahsildar of Kadur Taluk 2246is before this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No. 2 of 2026 for offences punishable under Section 13(1)(a) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘Act’ for short). 2. Heard the learned senior counsel Sri P. P. Hegde appearing for the petitioner and Sri B. Lethif, learned counsel representing the respondents/Lokayuktha. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 3. The petitioner, at the relevant point in time, was functioning as the Ex-Officio Secretary of the Bagair Hukum Committee of Tarikere Taluk and after joining the office of the Tahsildar on 29-06-2022 she has worked up to 31-07-2023. The entire fulcrum of the crime revolves between these dates. It transpires that certain persons had encroached the forest land. The forest officials are said to have investigated into the said matter, upon which, certain saguvali chits are produced before the forest officials by those persons who had allegedly encroached the forest land. This becomes the genesis of the problem. The forest officials then write to the State with the documents or the saguvali chits that were produced to them to verify and take necessary action. After a preliminary enquiry, an approval comes to be granted under Section 17A of the Act against the petitioner for registration of the crime. It then becomes the impugned crime in Crime No. 2 of 2026 for the aforesaid offences. Registration of the crime is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. The learned senior counsel Sri P. P. Hegde appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 had not issued any saguvali chits during her tenure and therefore those saguvali chits that were produced at the time when the forest officials enquired or investigated into the possession of those persons who were holding the saguvali chits were forged. The saguvali chits have been set up by those persons again on the signature of the petitioner. He would take this Court through a particular document of the Tahsildar who succeeded the petitioner to demonstrate that the Tahsildar himself has indicated that there is no saguvali chit issued from the office of the Tahsildar. Therefore, on this circumstance, the learned senior counsel submits that the petitioner being at no fault, must not be permitted to undergo the rigmarole of the procedure under the Criminal Justice System. 5. The Learned Counsel B. Lethif appearing for the Lokayuktha would however refute the submissions contending that the plea set up by the petitioner is that those persons who are holding the saguvali chits have forged the signatures of the petitioner. This becomes a matter of evidence. No doubt, the petitioner is now drawn as accused in the case at hand. The matter is still at the stage of investigation. The other accused - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 may be drawn as accused at the time of filing of the charge sheet. He would submit that this Court must not interdict or obliterate the crime against the petitioner for the reason that it has several hues and forms of corruption. 6. The Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would also toe the lines of the learned counsel appearing for the Lokayuktha in contending that all the allegations are looked into by the State and then only an approval under Section 17A of the Act has been granted by the State. Therefore, there is no warrant of interference at this stage. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The issue lies in a narrow compass. The period for which the issue is concerned is between 29-06-2022 and 31-07-2023. When the petitioner was working as Tahsildar, Tarikere Taluk, she was also the ex-officio secretary of the Bagair Hukum Committee. The Chairman of which is the sitting Member of the Legislative - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 Assembly and there are three other nominated members. The issue crops up after the petitioner exits from the post of Tahsildar of Tarikere Taluk, where certain lands belonging to five persons are allegedly issued saguvali chits and those lands were belonging to the forest department. The forest department has a separate claim over those lands and have initiated proceedings against those persons who are holding the saguvali chits and the present proceedings against the petitioner. 9. The functioning of the petitioner between the said dates is not in dispute. The saguvali chits being issued on 02-12-2022 and thereafter is not in dispute. Therefore, the saguvali chits, five in number in the case at hand have been issued during the tenure of the petitioner. The allegation is that the applicants were different and the saguvali chits are issued to different persons who have now become the alleged encroachers of a forest land, all because it is issued by the petitioner who was the Ex-officio Secretary of the Bagair Hukum Committee. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 10. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner would project that the petitioner's signature has been forged and the saguvali chits have been set up by those persons who are encroached the forest land. Therefore, the issue as to who has forged whose signature cannot be deciphered in a proceeding under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Investigation in the least must take place in the case at hand, as the period in which the saguvali chits are issued is when the petitioner was functioning as the Tahsildar of Tarikere Taluk and the signatures of the petitioner are found on the said saguvali chits. 11. Whether it is a forged photocopy, the original of which is available or not and the Tahsildar's endorsement that no such saguvali chits were issued in favour of those applicants found in the said communication, all of which are in the maze of disputed questions of fact. If it is a maze of disputed questions of fact, it would amaze this Court to interfere under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The allegation against the petitioner who was the Ex-officio Secretary of the Bagair Hukum Committee is, she has acted Bagair Kanoon. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27967 WP No. 14518 of 2026 12. In view of the above, finding no warrant to interfere, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44