J.V SUBRAYA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. PRATHEEP K C., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY RANGE FOREST OFFICER HANUBALAU SECTION SAKLESHPURA REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-01. (BY SMT. WAHEEDA, HCGP) …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN RFO SKP FOC NO.57/2021-22, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 24a, 24b, 24g, 24gg, 24h, 24j AND 73(d) OF KARNATAKA FOREST ACT 1963, SECTION 2 OF FOREST CONSERVATION ACT 1980 R/W ARTICLES 21, 48A, 51A(g) OF INDIAN CONTITUTION REGISTERED BY DEPUTY RANGE FOREST OFFICER, HANUBALU SECTION, SAKLESHPUR, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAKLESHPURA AGAINST THE PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:606 CRL.P No. 13395 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following relief:

Wherefore the petitioner in the above petition most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the FIR in RFO SKP FOC No.57/2021-2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 24a, 24b, 24g, 24gg, 24h, 24j and 73(d) of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, Section 2 of Forest Conservation Act, 1980 r/w Article 21, 48A, 51A(g) of Indian Constitution registered by Deputy Range Forest Officer, Hanubalu Section, Sakleshpur, pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC, Sakaleshpura, against the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on the basis of Mahazar dated 30.01.2022, the respondent registered FIR in Crime No.RFO SKP FOC No.57/2021-22 and commenced investigation against the petitioner the alleged offences punishable under Sections 24a, 24b, 24g, 24gg, 24h, 24j and 73(d) of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, without obtaining necessary mandatory permission from the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. since the said offences are non- cognizable offences for which obtaining of prior permission is - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:606 CRL.P No. 13395 of 2024 required in law. It is also relevant to state that though subsequently on 19.03.2022, respondent is said to have obtained permission from the jurisdictional Magistrate, the subsequent obtaining of permission cannot in any way cure the inherent fatal defect of non- obtaining of prior/previous permission prior to investigation as contemplated under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. and consequently, on this short ground alone, the impugned proceedings deserves to be quashed.