Karnataka High Court
Sri B Venkata Reddy vs Sri V Yedukondulu on 25 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
CCC No. 901 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 901 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI B VENKATA REDDY
S/O BYRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
R/AT NEAR SUBHASH ROAD,
SRINIVASPURA TOWN
SRINIVASPURA TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563138.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. VENKATARAMA REDDY L., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI V YEDUKONDULU
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
Digitally DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
signed by KOLAR DIVISION,
RUPA V KOLAR DISTRICT-563101.
Location:
High Court
Of 2. SRI. K. MAHESH
Karnataka AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RANGE FOREST OFFICER
SRINIVASPUR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563135.
3. SRI. ANIL KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
ASSISTANT RANGE FOREST OFFICER
SRINIVASPUR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563135.
4. SRI. G.HARISH
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
ASSISTANT RANGE FOREST OFFICER
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
CCC No. 901 of 2023
HC-KAR
MALUR,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563130.
5. SRI. KRISHNA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
FOREST OFFICER
SRINIVASPUR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563135.
6. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
MS BUILDING, AMBEDKAR BHEEDHI
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA -560001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY.
...ACCUSED
(BY SRI. C. S. PRADEEP, AAG WITH
SMT. SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR A1 TO A6)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 READ WITH SECTIONS 11 AND 12
OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT,
WHERE IN HE PRAYS THAT THE HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO
INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE
ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 FOR HAVING INTENTIONALLY DISOBEYED
ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT
ORDER AND WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED
21.8.2023 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.18333/2023
(GM-FOR) AS PER ANNEXURE-C.
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED ON 16.10.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
CCC No. 901 of 2023
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
This contempt petition is filed under Article 215 of the
Constitution of India read with Sections 11 and 12 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging willful disobedience of
the interim order dated 21.08.2023 passed by the learned
Single Judge in W.P.No.18333/2023 (GM-FOR).
2. Sri.Venkatarama Reddy L., learned counsel
appearing for the complainant submits that the accused willfully
violated the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge
on 21.08.2023 wherein it was specifically ordered not to
dispossess the complainant and in violation of the same, with
the help of 15 JCBs and 100 policemen on the midnight of
23.08.2023, the accused cut the grown mango trees. It is
submitted that this Court in W.P.Nos.17970-17972/2009 has
directed the respondent No.2 therein to consider the request of
the petitioners for issuance of saguvali chit and also directed
not to resort to coercive steps to evict the petitioners from the
lands in question. It is further submitted that the Appellate
Authority allowed the appeal filed by the complainant and
others at Annexure-B dated 14.10.2022. The said order clearly
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
HC-KAR
indicates that the respondents were directed to conduct a joint
survey and thereafter, consider the case of the appellants
therein. However, without conducting any joint survey, the
order of eviction was passed and high-handedly, the standing
trees were cut in violation of the interim order. It is also
submitted that the accused did not allow the complainant to
take photographs of the cutting of trees and he was able to
take photographs after cutting of trees and raising them to
ground. The action of the accused is like goondas and the
petitioner lodged a complaint about the illegal act of the
accused before the Superintendent of Police, Kolar. It is
contended that the complainant has brought to the notice of
the accused with regard to the passing of the interim order.
Despite the same, the accused, in violation of the interim order
dated 21.08.2023 passed in W.P.No.18333/2023 have cut and
removed the standing mango trees. Hence, he seeks to
proceed with the contempt proceedings by punishing the
accused.
3. Per contra, Sri.C.S.Pradeep, learned Additional
Advocate General for the respondent Nos.1 to 6 submits that
the accused have filed a detailed affidavit indicating the manner
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
HC-KAR
of taking possession pursuant to the order of eviction. It is
submitted that the interim order granted by the learned Single
Judge was not communicated to the respondent-accused on the
date of taking possession and the same was communicated
only on 25.08.2023. By that time, the possession of the
encroached forest land was taken by the authorities. It is
further submitted that the respondent-authorities have filed a
complaint against the complainant for obstructing the discharge
of duty by the officials. The order of eviction was passed on
09.01.2023 and the interim order by the learned Single Judge
is on 21.08.2023 and the authorities evicted the petitioner from
the encroached portion on 23.08.2023 and the respondent-
accused were not having any knowledge about the interim
order passed by the learned Single Judge. It is also submitted
that the writ petition is pending consideration by the learned
Single Judge and the correctness of the order of eviction is
required to be adjudicated in the pending writ petition. Hence,
he seeks to dismiss the contempt petition.
4. We have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel for the complainant, the learned Additional Advocate
General for the respondent Nos.1 to 6 and perused the material
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
HC-KAR
available on record. We have given our anxious consideration
to the submissions made on both sides.
5. The records indicate that the accused No.1 passed
an order on 09.01.2023 under Section 64A of the Karnataka
Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The
complainant assailed the action of the accused in
W.P.No.18333/2023. The learned Single Judge in the said writ
petition passed the following order on 21.08.2023:
"Learned AGA is requested to accept notice for all
respondents.
Interim order of this dispossession, till next date of
hearing. This interim protection is granted since the
impugned order does not mention about the
participation of survey personnel from the Revenue
Department."
6. The complainant has alleged that the accused, in
violation of the aforesaid order cut the trees and took
possession on 23.08.2023. It is to be noticed that the
respondent No.1 has passed the order on 09.01.2023, the writ
petition challenging the same came to be filed in the month of
August 2023 and the interim order in the said writ petition was
granted on 21.08.2023. The accused No.1 filed an affidavit
indicating that pursuant to the order dated 09.01.2023 the
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
HC-KAR
possession of encroached area was taken from the complainant
on 23.08.2023 and the mahazar is produced for having taken
possession of the encroached land. The affidavit further
indicates that the interim order of the learned Single Judge was
only communicated to the accused on 25.08.2023 vide letter at
Annexure-2 to the affidavit. The aforesaid fact clearly indicates
that the accused have taken possession of the encroached land
on 23.08.2023 as they were not aware about the passing of the
interim order dated 21.08.2023 by the learned Single Judge.
The knowledge of the interim order to the accused is only on
25.08.2023. Paragraph No.10 of the affidavit clearly indicates
that the complainant has not produced any document to show
the intimation of the interim order passed by this Court in
W.P.No.18333/2023 dated 21.08.2023. It is to be further
noticed that the complainant has submitted a
representation/complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Kolar,
on 25.08.2023 alleging the incident of 23.08.2023. The
complainant has not placed on record any material to indicate
that the interim order of the learned Single Judge dated
21.08.2023 was served on the accused and despite the
knowledge in violation of the said order, they have taken
possession of the land from the complainant. In the absence of
NC: 2025:KHC:42559-DB
HC-KAR
any such material before the Court, we cannot come to the
conclusion that the accused have willfully disobeyed the interim
order of the learned Single Judge dated 21.08.2023. It is also
noticed that the writ petition filed by the complainant is
pending adjudication before the learned Single Judge. In view
of the same, we keep all the contentions open to be
adjudicated before the learned Single Judge including the
allegation of high-handedness of the accused in taking
possession.
7. With the aforesaid reasoning and observation, we
drop the contempt proceedings discharging the notice issued to
the accused.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
RV
