Karnataka High Court
B P Marappa vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.628 OF 2011
BETWEEN:
B.P.MARAPPA,
S/O LATE PUTTAPPA,
@ DODDA THAMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
BALLUR HUNDI VILLAGE,
NANJANGUD TALUK,
MYSORE DISTRICT. ... APPELLANT
[BY SRI.M SHARASS CHANDRA, ADVOCATE]
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY NANJUNAGUDU POLICE
(REP: STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR). ... RESPONDENT
[BY SRI.K.K.KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP]
----
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2)
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DT:30.5.11
PASSED BY THE I ADDL.DIST., AND S.J., MYSORE IN
SPL.C.NO.101/08 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138(1)(a) OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 2003,
SEC.429 IPC AND SEC.9 R/W SEC.51 OF THE WILD LIFE
PROTECTION ACT. AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED
TO PAY A FINE OF RS.10,000/- FOR THE OFFENCE U/S 138(1)(a)
OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 2003 AND IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF
FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR 6 MONTHS;
AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED SENTENCED TO PAY FINE OF
RS.10,000/- AND IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO
S.I. FOR 6 MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 429 IPC.
AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS FURTHER SENTENCED TO
UNDERGO R.I. FOR 3 YEARS AND TO PAY A FINE OF RS.10,000/-
2
AND IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 6
MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 9 P/U/S 51 OF THE WILD LIFE
PROTECTION ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the accused feeling
aggrieved by the Judgment and order of conviction and
sentence passed by the I Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Mysore, in Spl. Case No.101/2008, wherein, he
has been convicted and sentenced for the offences
punishable under Section 138(1)(a) of the Electricity Act,
2003, Section 429 of IPC and Section 9 read with Section
51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
2. Heard both sides and perused the material on
record.
3. It is the case of prosecution that the accused
has unauthorizedly drawn electricity connection to the
fence put up by him around his land bearing
Sy.No.91/6 P-2 of Naganapura village, Hullalli Hobli,
Nanjangud Taluk. On 24.11.2007, a female elephant
came in contact with the said fencing and died due to
electric shock.
4. Charges were framed against the accused for
offences punishable under Section 9 r/w Section 51 of
the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Section 429 IPC and
Sections 39 and 44 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003.
5. In order to bring home the guilt of the
accused, the prosecution got examined 15 witnesses and
got marked 18 documents.
6. The Trial Court has come to the conclusion
that the accused is guilty of offences punishable under
Section 138(1)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003, Section
429 of IPC and Section 9 read with Section 51 of the
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
7. PW1, in his complaint, has stated that on
24.11.2007, a forest Guard by name Sri K.Mohammad-
PW2 along with other staff while on patrolling duty at
Hedeyala Wild Life Range, noticed a dead elephant in
land bearing Sy.No.91/6 P-2 of Naganapura Village,
Hullalli Hobli, Nanjangud Taluk. He informed the matter
to him and immediately he went to the spot and noticed
that the elephant had died due to electric shock. He
conducted spot mahazar as per Ex.P2. The photographs
taken were marked as Exs.3 to 9.
8. PW1 has deposed in consonance with the
complaint averments and his evidence is corroborated by
the evidence of PW2. PWs.3 to 8 have turned hostile
and their evidence is not helpful to the prosecution case.
However, there is no dispute with regard to death of the
elephant due to electric shock. PW10-Doctor who
conducted necropsy over the dead elephant has opined
that the death was on account of electrocution and
shock. The post mortem report is marked as Ex.P.14.
9. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
appellant that the prosecution has not placed any
material to show that the accused has drawn
unauthorized electric connection to the fencing put
around his land and therefore, he has contended that the
death of the elephant is nothing to do with electrical
fencing alleged to have been erected by the accused.
The said contention cannot be accepted. It is no doubt
true that the aluminium wire or the ACSR wire alleged to
have been used by the accused are not seized.
However, the prosecution has got examined
PW9-photographer. The photographs are marked as
Exs.3 to 9, which shows that an electricity connection
was taken by the accused and the wire was connected
to the fence erected around his land. The same is not
disputed. PW9 has not been cross-examined. Further,
PW11 namely Junior Engineer, CESC, has given his
report as per Ex.P15 stating about the electric supply as
well as the electric connection given to the fencing put
around the land of the accused. Hence, the findings
recorded by the Trial Court for convicting the appellant-
accused for the offence punishable under Section
138(1)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Section 429 of
IPC does not call for any interference.
10. Under Section 55 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act,
1972, no court shall take cognizance of any offence under
the Act, except on a complaint of the officers mentioned
therein. Admittedly, in the instant case, cognizance is not
taken on the basis of a complaint. On the other hand, it
is on the basis of the charge sheet filed by the police.
In that view of the matter, the conviction and sentence
passed against the accused for the offence punishable
under Section 9 read with Section 51 of the Act cannot
be sustained. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is partly allowed.
ii. The Judgment and Order passed by the
I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysore, dated
30.05.2011 in Spl.Case No.101/2008 in so far as
convicting and sentencing the accused / appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 9 r/w Section 51 of
Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 is hereby set aside.
iii. The conviction and sentence for the offences
punishable under Section 138(1)(a) of the Electricity
Act 2003 and Section 429 IPC is hereby confirmed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
TL
