- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010193862026 NC: 2026:KHC:37792 CRL.P No. 4244 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4244 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SANATHAM S/O MITINGADORE, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT CHIKKAMATTI HAKKI PIKKI CAMP, GOUTHAMANAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.S.PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TUNGANAGARA POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPP-I) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.1076/2020 PENDING IN THE FILE OF V ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SHIVAMOGGA FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010193862026 NC: 2026:KHC:37792 CRL.P No. 4244 of 2026 UNDER SECTION 39, 44, 49, 49(B), 51 OF WIFE LIFE PROTECTION ACT R/W SECTION 379 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is accused no. 3 who gets embroiled in a crime along with other accused for offences punishable under Sections 39, 44, 49, 49B and 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act r/w Section 379 of the IPC. 2. Heard Sri B.S. Prasad, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor-I, appearing for the respondent. 3. The concerned Court tries the other accused, accused Nos.1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 in C.C.No.375 of 2013 and acquits them by order dated 15-10-2020 . The petitioner is accused no. 3. At the relevant point in time, he was not available for trial. The - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010193862026 NC: 2026:KHC:37792 CRL.P No. 4244 of 2026 reason rendered by the concerned Court to acquit all the other accused is as follows: “…. …. …. 18. It is worth to note that the counsel for the accused brought to the notice of this Court that by virtue of section 55 of Wild Life Protection Act, only complaint is to be filed before the Court and the investigating officer has filed charge sheet before the Court and argued there is irregularity in filing the charge sheet before the Court. On perusal of section 55 of the Wild Life Protection Act, it contemplates that private complaint is to be filed with respect to the offence committed under the Wild Life Protection Act and the investigating officer without filing private complaint, has filed charge sheet against the accused persons which is not proper in the eye of law. As such, benefit of doubt is to be extended to the Accused persons. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in the Negative.” The petitioner being co-accused is also entitled to the same relief that is granted by the concerned Court qua accused Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.1076 of 2020 pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga stands quashed qua the petitioner. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010193862026 NC: 2026:KHC:37792 CRL.P No. 4244 of 2026 Consequently, I.A.No.1 of 2026 also stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 92