High Court Karnataka High Court

Durgada Rajegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Durgada Rajegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 July, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
:m.m" €3F §€.".&§$M.M'A§{fia Mifiéw €0i.fim:'_.€}§E'_;i€.AW%é&'?'m{2§. §~%E&-M QOURT 0? KARNATAKAW Hififi COUR? OF KARNATAKA HEGH cmum C}? K&RNATAKfla WEN QQMRT

IR T33 HIGH COURT or KARHAEAKA AT BANGALGRE
namn was was 9''' am' 03 mm! 2999.1"f*- "j--, "~..

BEFGRE

ms Ho:~:*2z.z Mr. JUSTICE   V

CRIMINAL PETITIGN ko.2§¢a/2¢9a :'xf«'*T

BETWEER:

Durgada Rajeqowda .,

sfo.lata H3magowfla_4F. _

Aged abcut 5? y%ars"T-' H:  <,x_»
Rfo.Me.£f8, Crescant ra§d  : r". '
Kumara Fark East 1 ~g Hf»_ I ,1
sanga1e:e--3sv?§b1\wA :~* "~ =f»_ L ...PETI?IONER

zay Sri s;a.sgeathna:ayaa,%g¢v;;a

ANS: _ .... H V 'n. . «H »

1.

ststé gt x3£h§ta§s{ _;.

Represented.hy’it3_Secretary
napartmant of rarest
fikasa Sagan;

_*Banga;¢re~G1,.- …..

*2} The Asfiistant Conservator qr Forssts

,.KEg§gli§u;a ranga
.A-xanaksgura
,Banga1§re South Sub-Division.

. 3. Th: Range Forgst utrieer

n,_xan3kapura Range
_ xannkapura
” Bangalore South Taluk. …RE3PONDEflT3

V” =»~iBy Sri P.M.Hawaz, Addl.3PP)

THIS CRL.P FIkED Uf$.482 CR.P.C. PRKYIHG
THRT THIS HOfi’BhE CGGRT MR? BE PLEASED T0 QUHSH
THE GRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING’ IN
C.C.RO.2169f2G07 GK THE FILE OF THE CHIEF
JUDICIAL HASISTRRTE, BANGALORE (R) DISTRICT,

ifilfiiéfiéféf GP Ka9«%Mfi%TAK& MEQEWE CUi.§§%?_?;7fiF-_3K.fl«WNfia”¥’AKfl WGH cmsm’ 6? mwmam HIGH CQHRY Q? KfiaRNA”?”fl§{& fiififiwfi CQURT 0% KARNAYMQA HEQH GOURE

3. It is submitted by sri s.!~l.P.swathna:ayan..

laarnafi counsel appearing for the patitiaziér-…”j:ti:liat

the criminal proceedings should ‘:.i:”‘ba’§i:’
initiated against the petiticmex:
desfinite fiztding as to vf3>et;*§_e£°i

questiaz: is a forest ::«:’~ :3 . …13and.=.i’

According to him, __sin-ca ~ by hint
is pnnding consitiéiraiiiogn “‘h&ffa.:a the Chiaf
canservatar of .fi.c::a:’sVtAs}V,. Vfiégngfalcre, the

proceedizxggiiv fie 3: i ” ”

;’§’.L;€:araa§§e1:§”ticsnad.5 cantantion at the
petitignser .Lbe:_:”‘a'<:cepte:i in as much as it
resally £1'1g"J._ai$i;i_ »':g:i;iy23$ti<::: is mt an retest land,

Stun' 'ma ;:ei:i1.§i§}ne.§- will be acquitted. However as

pa; t_ha_ Qsrgtaxnmnt regards, the land in question

i_-5-"_aiA Based on Government records, a

coEw1a_i;nt.n3"is lodged. It really, the praparty is

n<:jt fivfibrest land. it is opan~£or.tb.e petitioner
:ufr:on:tend so bate.-re the Criminal court: by

pirodu-sing evidence. So' also, the state will have

to prmra its case hayoné the reasonable doubt.

xv"

WWW Q? KARNATAMA Mfififié Cfl¥.,§R’E:AA{“;#§’-1-_:%£3hM*’é&”¥”é53aE{& Mfififi fii’iLZT?E.§W’ Q? §<fi.RMA'%"A¥{fia E-§§€'.§H WQUW" £3? zmmmmm Hififi CQWEW Q? zwwazmm §~§E€-3% CQURT

5. In this View of the matter, rm gxngnds

am rorthcanaing ta quash the pro¢§§d3LL:n§s..

Paatiticn is accordingly dismisaad.

I153.