The High Court in Karnataka expressed a shock to the forest lawsuit in registering a criminal case against the Commissioner’s assistant (AC) of the Ministry of Income to adopt a quasi-social order describing a certain land as a “government gomal” against the statement of the forest department.
“The shock of the court’s conscience is a forest department that registers crime to fulfill quasi-social functions of AC. As an assistant to a commissioner who looked into the records, he issued an order that did not compare the forest to a private entity but followed it as” Sarcari Gomala “according to the Ministry of Finance,” the court noted.
Justice M. Nagaprasann approved the order and at the same time allowed the petition to submit Ba Jagadeesh, the then AC Hassan Sub-Division, which now works as the project director of Hassan District Development Cell.
The complaint before the judicial judge of Hassan was filed by the officer IFOS SauraBh Kumar, the then representative of the forest, Hassan Territory Division, in 2024.
AC order
AC approved the order of January 5, 2022, declared a certain land located in the village of Tyavalli, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, as “Sarkari (government) Gomal” and many people were used to access their private land. The introduction that the land has been a “government gomal” in rental and law records (RTC) for many years, but in recent RTCS it was classified as “forest”, but the forest department did not execute documents on the basis of which the RTC items were changed.
However, the deputy of the Commissioner Hassan approved the quasi-supreme order asking AC to recall the problem to give a sufficient opportunity to hear the forest department.
Interestingly, the forest department, soon after the Deputy Commissioner, returned the problem back to AC, registered a criminal complaint on January 27, 2024 against the petitioner, who then did not hold AC Hassan.
“AFTER HAVING FILED AN APPEAL AND SECURING AN ORDER OF REMAND TO CONSIDER The ISSUE AFRESH, IT DID NOT LIE WITH The Forest Department And FoundaDed on Mens Rea, ”The Court Obvious While Noticing that The Petitioner Had Not Given The Land to Any Private Persons But Had Termed as Land Belonging to the Revenue Department On note that they were used for cattle grazing for ever.
Abortion
The permit continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner in such circumstances would result in abortion by justice and became an abuse of the law of the law, the court stated in the annulment of the complaint. The criminal case against the petitioner was registered for the purpose of alleged violation of the provisions of the Forest Act (protection) of 1980.
Published – 16 July 2025 20:44 IS IS
