Karnataka High Court
B. Venkatesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 November, 2025
-1-
CRL.A No. 102 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.102 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
B. VENKATESH
S/O BOMMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
MEMBER OF CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,
C.K.PURA, 11TH CROSS,
CHITRADURGA CITY - 577 501.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADV.)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION,
CHITRADURGA - 577 501.
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 01.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2018, PASSED BY THE
KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS,
AT BANGALORE (COURT HALL -2) IN L.G.C.(T)NO.2329/2017,
CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S 192(A)(1) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT AND
SECTION 447 OF IPC.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 18.11.2025 AND COMING ON FOR
"PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS" THIS DAY, THE COURT,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
CRL.A No. 102 of 2019
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CAV JUDGMENT
Appellant is before this court challenging the order dated 22nd November, 2018, passed in LGC(T) No.2329 of 2017 by the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Courts, Bengaluru "for short, "the Special Court").
2. For the sake of convenience, parties herein are referred to as per their status before the special court.
3. The investigating officer submitted Charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under section 192(A)(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and under section 447 of Indian Penal Code. The case was registered in CC.No.1132 of 2013 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Chitradurga. Thereafter, the case was transferred to special court and registered in LGC(T) No.2329 of 2007 on the file of Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Courts at Bengaluru.
4. It is alleged by the prosecution that the accused has obtained permission from Department of Mines and Geology for installation of Stone Crusher in his land bearing Sy.No.94/2 of Iyyanahalli, Chitradurga Taluk. Instead of installing Stone -3- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 Crusher in his land bearing survey No.94/2, the accused has trespassed into the government land bearing survey No.53 situate by the side of land in survey No.94/2 and installed the stone crusher in the Government land. It has been further alleged that the accused was directed to vacate the government land in survey No.53 several times, but he continued to be in occupation of government land over an area of 2 acres and they running a stone crusher. Thus, the accused committed the alleged offence. Transferor I Additional Civil judge and JMFC, Chitradurga has framed charges against the accused for alleged commission of offence. The same was read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined nine witnesses as PWs1 to 9 and marked eleven documents as Exhibits P1 to P11 and no material objects were marked. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement of the accused under section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded and the accused denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses. But, he has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf. However, the accused has produced copy of the judgment in Original Suit No.59 of 2013 and the certified copy of the judgment in Regular Appeal No.24 of 2016. Having -4- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 heard the arguments on both sides, the Special Court has convicted the accused for offence under section 192(A)(1) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act and under section 447 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced the accused to suffer imprisonment for a period of one year and pay fine offer Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall suffer imprisonment for a period of one month. Further, the Special Court convicted the accused for the offence punishable under section 447 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a period of one month. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
5. Sri R Shashidhara, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the impugned judgment passed by the special court is perverse, arbitrary and contrary to the established principles of law. He would submit that the case of prosecution is mainly depending upon the complaint alleged by the Deputy Tahsildar. The Deputy Tahsildar lodged, the complaint alleging that the appellant trespassed into the land of government. But the complainant or the Tahsildar, before initiating proceedings under the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, have not at all followed the procedure -5- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 contemplated in this behalf. The learned Counsel would further submit that the Government of Karnataka has issued a circular stating that before initiating the proceedings under section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, the concerned officer should follow Circular. The investigating officer has not complied with the same. The appellant has filed Suit against the Tahsildar and others in OS No. 59 of 2013 for permanent injunction and the said suit came to be dismissed. As against this judgment and decree, the appellant has preferred appeal in RA No.24 of 2016 before I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, which thereafter came to be transferred to Special Court. The special Court has not considered the same. The concerned authorities have not issued 15 days prior notice providing an opportunity to the accused to submit his explanation. The evidence on record reveals that the Tahsildar has given just three days time to the appellant to submit his explanation. But the same is also not served to the appellant. Accordingly, the concerned authorities have failed to follow the directions issued in the circular issued by the Government of Karnataka before initiating the proceedings under section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act. To substantiate his arguments, the learned counsel has relied on decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of SMT. LALITHA -6- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 SHASTRI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION AND OTHERS reported in ILR 2008 KAR. 4520 and the judgment of the court in Crl.RP No.915 of 2022 dated 8th July 2025, rendered in the Case of Sri K.K. SURESH v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PONNAMPET POLICE.
6. Sri B Lakshman, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, would fairly submit that the Tahsildar has not issued 15 days prior notice as per the Circular issued by the Government of Karnataka.
7. Before appreciation of evidence on record, it is necessary to mention here to Point 15.04 of Chapter XV of Karnataka Land Revenue and Survey Manual, which provides for Rules for the guidance of Officers and Officials of the Department, which contemplates that whenever encroachment is made by the adjoining land holder on the government land, measurement of encroachment portion is to be made and the plan sent to revenue authorities so as to take action under section 94 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. The Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of SMT. LALITHA SASTRY (supra) has extracted the Circular dated 08th -7- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 September, 2008 issued by the Government of Karnataka, Revenue Department. The same reads thus:
"ಸಂ ೆ ಆgï 674 ಎ © 2008 ಕ ಾ ಟಕ ಸ ಾ ರದ ಸ ಾಲಯ,
ಬಹುಮಹ ಗಳ ಕಟ ಡ,
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 08.09.2008
ಸು ೊ"ೕ$ೆ
%ಷಯ: ಒತು"ವ*+ಾದ ಸ ಾ * ಜ-ೕನನು/ ೆರವ01ೊ2ಸುವ ಬ1ೆ3 ***** ಸ ಾ * ಜ-ೕನುಗಳ45ನ ಒತು"ವ*ಯನು/ ೆರವ01ೊ2ಸುವ ಸಲು ಾ6 ಕ ಾ ಟಕ ಭೂ ಕಂ8ಾಯ ಾ9:1ೆ ;ದು:ಪ ತಂದು ಕಲಂ 92(ಎ)ರ ಅ ಯ45 ಅಪ>ಾಧಗಳ@ ಮತು"
ABೆಗಳ@ ಎಂಬ Cೊಸ ಅDಾ ಯವನು/ Eೇಪ Fೆ Gಾಡ$ಾ6ರುತ"8ೆ. ಸದ* ;ದು:ಪ ಾ9:ಯನHಯ ಸ ಾ * ಜ-ೕIನ45 ಅನJಕೃತ ಾ6 ಒತು"ವ* Gಾ ೊಂ ರುವವರ %ರುದL MN-ನ Oಕದ:Pಗಳನು/ 8ಾಖಲು Gಾಡಲು ಅವ ಾಶ ಕ4Sಸ$ಾ6ರುತ"8ೆ. ಸದj ಾ9:ಯ ಅ ಯ45 MN-ನ Oಕದ:Pಗಳನು/ 8ಾಖಲು Gಾಡುವ ಮುನ/ ಸಂಬಂJTದವ*1ೆ ಅವರು CೊಂUರುವ 8ಾಖ$ೆಗಳನು/ Cಾಜರು ಪ ಸಲು ಒಂದು ಅವ ಾಶವನು/ (Opportunity) Iೕಡುವ0ದು ಅವಶ ೆಂದು ಸ ಾ ರವ0 ಮನಗಂ 8ೆ.
ಆದ:*ಂದ ಕ ಾ ಟಕ ಭೂ ಕಂ8ಾಯ ಾ9:ಯ ಕಲಂ 192(ಎ)ರ ಅ ಯ45
ಒತು"ವ*8ಾರರ «ರುದL MN-ನ Oಕದ:Pಗಳನು/ 8ಾಖಲು Gಾಡುವ ಮುನ/ ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡ
Gಾಗ ಸೂ ಗಳನು/ ಅನುಸ*ಸುವಂ ೆ ಸೂ ಸ$ಾ68ೆ:-
1. ಸ ಾ * ಜ-ೕನನು/ ಒತು"ವ* Gಾ ೊಂ ರುವ08ಾ6 ;2ದು ಬಂದ
vÀWಣ ಅಂxÀ ವ M" / ಸಂEೆY1ೆ +ಾವ ಆDಾರದ Pೕ$ೆ ಆ ಸ ಾ * ಜ-ೕIನ EಾHJೕನವನು/ CೊಂUರು;"ೕ* ಎಂಬ ಬ1ೆ3 ;2T, ಅದ ೆZ ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ 8ಾಖ$ಾ;ಗಳನು/ ಸೂಕ" %ವರ[ೆ\ಂU1ೆ °TvÀ ರೂಪದ45 15 Uನಗ]ೆ^ ಳ1ಾ6 ಸWಮ _ಾNJ ಾರ ೆZ ತಲು`ಸಲು ;2ಸತಕZದು:.
2. IಗUತ ಅವJ\ಳ1ೆ ಸಂಬಂJTದ ಒತು"ವ*8ಾರರು +ಾವ08ೇ 8ಾಖ$ೆಗಳನು/ ಒದ6ಸ8ೇ ಇದ:45 ಸWಮ _ಾNJ ಾರವ0 IಗJತ ಾ$ಾವJ ಮು6ದ ನಂತರ ಒತು"ವ* ಸYಳ ೆZ bೇc Iೕ 1ಾNಮಸHರ ಸಮWಮದ45 ತI ೆ ನFೆT ಒತು"ವ* ಎಂದು ಕಂಡುಬಂದ45 ಮಹಜd ಬ>ೆದು ಅದ ೆZ Cಾಜ*ದ: 1ಾNಮಸYರ ಸeಗಳನು/ ಪFೆದು ತದನಂತರ ಒತು"ವ*8ಾರರ Pೕ$ೆ ಕ ಾ ಟಕ ಭೂ ಕಂ8ಾಯ ಾ9: ಕಲಂ 192(ಎ)ರ ಯ45 MN-ನ Oಕದ:Pಗಳನು/ 8ಾಖ4ಸಲು ಕNಮ ೆ1ೆದು ೊಳfತಕZದು:.-8- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019
3. ಒತು"ವj8ಾರರು ೋcೕಸು ಪFೆದ ನಂತರ ಕgೇ*1ೆ bೇc Iೕ 8ಾಖ$ಾ;ಗಳನು/ Cಾಜರುಪ Tದ45 ಆ 8ಾಖ$ಾ;ಗಳ ೈಜ ೆಯನು/ %ವರ[ೆ\ಂU1ೆ ಕೂಲಂಕುಷ ಾ6 ಪ*Aೕ4T, 8ಾಖ$ಾ;ಗಳನು/ ನಕಲು ಅಥ ಾ ಸೃj ತ ಎಂದು ಕಂಡುಬಂದ45 ಒತು"ವ*8ಾರರ %ರುದL ಭೂ ಕಂ8ಾಯ ಾ9: ಕಲಂ 192(ಎ)ರ ಯ45 MN-ನ Oಕದ:P 8ಾಖ4ಸಲು ಕNಮ ೈ1ೊಳfತಕZದು:."
8. As per the said Circular, it is clear that the Government is now convinced that an opportunity should be given to all those alleged encroachers of Government land before any proceedings or initiated under Section 192A of the Act. In fact, it's a procedure which a show-cause notice used to be given calling upon those alleged encroachers to file their objections within fifteen days. If no objections are received, authorities are called upon to visit the spot, conduct mahazar in the presence of the villagers, obtained their signatures, and thereafter to initiate criminal proceedings if they are satisfied that there is encroachment. In the event of alleged encroachers producing documents, the authorities shall examine the same and only in the event of said documents are found to be fabricated or a duplicate one, to initiate proceedings under the said Section. In fact, the said procedure contemplated by the Government satisfy the requirement of principles of natural justice, i.e. an opportunity is given to the persons to realise whether they have occupied a Government land and if they are -9- CRL.A No. 102 of 2019 convinced, to surrender possession to avoid criminal prosecution.
9. In the case on hand, on perusal of entire material and record, I do not find any material to show that the concerned Authority has followed the mandatory provisions of section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act and also the aforesaid Circular issued by the Government of Karnataka. Without complying the mandatory provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, Karnataka Land Revenue Rules and also the Circular issued by the Government of Karnataka, the complaint against this accused is not maintainable. I do not find any legal evidence to come to the conclusion that the accused has committed the alleged offence. The trial court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and facts. Accordingly, I proceed to pause the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal is allowed;
ii) Judgment dated 22nd November 2018, passed in LGC(T) No.2329 of 2017 by the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court at Bengaluru, is set aside;
- 10 -
CRL.A No. 102 of 2019
iii) Appellant is acquitted of the offence under section 192(A)(1) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act and for the Offence punishable under Section 447 of Indian Penal Code.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE lnn