Sahebgouda Halimani vs The State and S.K. Hiremath Asst. Executive Engineer JBC Sub-Division No. VIII KBJNL, Water Resource Department Bheemarayanagudi Tq. Shahapur

Mohan Shantanagoudar

Petitioner has sought for quashing the proceedings in Crime No. 21/2012 of Shahapur Rural Police Station registered for the offences punishable u/s 192A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Sections 420 and 447 of IPC. It is alleged that the petitioner encroached upon the Government land to certain extent and misutilized the same for his purpose. This Court in the case of Smt. Lalitha Sastry Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, in similar matters has ruled thus:-

From the aforesaid circular it is clear the Government is now convinced that an opportunity should be given to all those alleged encroachers of Government land before any proceedings are initiated u/s 192A of the Act. In fact it stipulates a procedure under which a show cause notice is to be given calling upon those alleged encroachers to file their objections within 15 days. If no objections are received authorities are called upon to visit the spot, conduct a Mahazar in the presence of the villagers, obtain their signatures and thereafter to initiate criminal proceedings if they are satisfied that there is encroachment. In the event of alleged encroachers producing documents to examine the same and only in the event of the said documents are found to be fabricated or duplicate, to initiate proceedings u/s 192A of the Act. In fact the said procedure contemplated by the Government satisfy the requirement of principles of natural justice, an opportunity is given to those persons to realise whether they have occupied a Government land and if they are convinced to surrender possession to avoid criminal prosecution. That would meet the ends of justice. In that view of the matter, as the criminal prosecution is launched against all these petitioners without affording an opportunity to have their say and in the light of the circular which is passed by the Government, these proceedings cannot be sustained.

In view of the above, the proceedings are liable to be quashed with liberty to the respondent-State to proceed as per the dictum laid down in the aforementioned judgment. Accordingly, the proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No. 21/2012, stands quashed. Liberty is reserved to the State or its authorities to comply with the requirement as contemplated in the Circular bearing No.RD.674.LGB.2008, dated 8.9.2008, before initiating action against the petitioner, if need be.

Petition is allowed accordingly.