SYED MOOSA @ MUZEEB vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1115 OF 2021 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS)-)
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1099 OF 2021 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS)-)
IN CRL.P No. 1115/2021
BETWEEN:
1.
SYED MOOSA @ MUZEEB
S/O. LATE SYED GHOUSE,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
2. SYED THABREZ
S/O. SYED MOOSA,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
3. SYED FAIROZ
S/O. SYED MOOSA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT KATTIGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI,
HOSKOTE TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
…PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. VANAJAKSHI P, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. RASHEED KHAN.,ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
THIRUMALASHETTAHALLI P.S.,
HOSKOTE,
BANGALORE RURAL,
SUB-DIVISION,
THIRUMALASHETTAHALLI CIRCLE,
BANGALORE-560 067.
REP. BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.SUHAS GOWDA M, HCPG)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT
MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE FIR BEARING CR.NO.89/2019
AND CHARGE SHEET NO.1234/2020 UNDER SEC.24,62,80 OF
THE KARNATAKA FOREST ACT AND UNDER RULES 144 AND
145 OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST AND ALSO UNDER SEC.379
OF THE IPC BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC OF HOSKOTE
AND ALLOW THIS PETITION.
IN CRL.P NO. 1099/2021
BETWEEN:
1.
SYED MOOSA @ MUZEEB
S/O. LATE SYED GHOUSE,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
2.
SYED ISHAQ @ BAKSHU
S/O. LATE SYED GHOUSE,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT KATTIGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI,
HOSKOTE TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. VANAJAKSHI P, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. RASHEED KHAN.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
THIRUMALASHETTAHALLI P.S.,
HOSKOTE,
BANGALORE RURAL,
SUB-DIVISION,
THIRUMALASHETTAHALLI CIRCLE,
BANGALORE-560 067.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.SUHAS GOWDA M, HCPG)
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE FIR
BEARING CR.NO.95/2020 UNDER SECTIONS 24, 62, 80 OF
KARNATAKA FOREST ACT AND UNDER RULES 144 AND 145
OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST RULES AND ALSO UNDER
SEC.379 OF THE IPC BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
OF HOSKOTE AND ALLOW THIS PETITION.
THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
ORAL ORDER
The Crl.P.No.1115/2021 is filed praying this court to
quash the FRI in Cr.No.89/2019 and charge sheet for the
offences punishable under Sections 24, 62, 80 of the Karnataka
Forest Act, 1963 and under Rules 144 and 145 of the
Karnataka Forest Rules and under Section 379 of IPC.
2. The Crl.P.No.1099/2021 is filed praying this court to
quash the FRI in Cr.No.95/2020 for the offences punishable
under Sections 24, 62, 80 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963
and under Rules 144 and 145 of the Karnataka Forest Rules
and under Section 379 of IPC.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties.
4. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is
that on credible information, on 21.07.2019, a raid was
conducted and found 45 number of logs weighing 1,442 kgs,
worth of Rs.43,26,000/- of red sandal wood and the same was
seized by drawing mahazar from 12.00 p.m. to 02.30 p.m. and
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
case is registered and investigated the matter and filed the
charge sheet.
5. The main contention of the counsel appearing for
the petitioner is that the very registration of the case is nothing
but false implication and is not in consonance with the statutory
and mandatory provisions of Section 154(1) of the Cr.PC. and
the same is not complied with, therefore, the complaint itself is
locus
not maintainable. The complainant has no to register the
case nor he is the aggrieved person as complaint itself
disclosed that the alleged red sandalwood pieces belongs to
forest area of Andrapradesh. Even if the complaint and FIR
taken at face value and accepted in entirety do not disclose any
commission of the offence. The petitioners have been falsely
implicated in the case and there is no any iota of material or
incriminating substances for indicating the petitioners for the
alleged offences and it is purely on the basis of surmises. It is
also contended that respondent police have not followed the
procedure as envisaged under Section 62 read with Section
71(A) of the Karnataka Forest Act, that the offences seizing the
property under the Karnataka Forest Act shall without any
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
reasonable delay produced the seized material before the
officers authorized by the State Government, not below the
rank of the Assistant Conservator of Forest and hence it
requires interference. Hence it requires interference of this
Court.
6. Learned HCGP appearing for the respondent/State
would submit that the complainant has received the credible
information i.e. CW1 and immediately rushed to the spot and
conducted the mahazar in the presence of CW2 to 4 and seized
the vehicle and to that effect CW5 and 6 are the witnesses and
CWs 7 to 17 are the witnesses, who are the part of raid and
CW20 certified that seized blocks are red sandal and CW21 to
24 are the police witnesses who have seized the same and
there are materials for having seized the red sandal and matter
requires to be tried before the trial Court. The other contention
that non-compliance of Section 62 and Section 71A of the
Karnataka Forest Act cannot be considered in a petition under
Section 482 of Cr.PC.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, and learned HCGP appearing for the
respondent/State and also on perusal of material available on
record, credible information was received that the petitioners
are making an attempt to transport the red sandal. Raid was
conducted and found the 45 blocks of red sandal at the spot
worth of Rs.43,26,000/- and there was no permit or licence to
that effect and when such raid was conducted and mahazar
was drawn and the very contention of the counsel for the
petitioners that no procedure was followed while seizing the red
sandal blocks cannot be considered in a petition under Section
482 of Cr.PC and the same could be considered at the time of
the trial and such defences cannot be entertained while seeking
for quashing of the FIR and when the witnesses who have been
cited are the part of raid as well as mahazar witnesses also
cited by the prosecution. Hence, I do not find any grounds to
entertain and quash the proceedings under Section 482 of
Cr.PC in a case of offences punishable under the Karnataka
Forest Act which have been invoked in the charge sheet as well
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58760
CRL.P No. 1115 of 2021
C/W CRL.P No. 1099 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010052982021
as violation of the rules of Forest Rules 144 and 145 of the
Karnataka Forest Rules 1969.
8. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, I
passed the following;
ORDER
Petitions are dismissed .
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE
RU
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25