Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Kar) 110

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
VENKATESH NAIK T., J.
Shantappa S/o Guddappa Harijan - Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 102370 of 2025
Decided On : 08-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Vidyashankar G. Dalwai
For the Respondent: Jairam Siddi

When evaluating bail, courts must balance the nature of the alleged offence, statutory compliance for seizures, and the petitioner's personal circumstances; strict adherence to statutory requirements can influence bail decisions.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482; Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 - Sections 24(e), 62(3), 71A, 84, 86, 87 - Application for anticipatory bail - Petitioner is accused of transporting sandalwood without license; no compliance with mandatory provisions of the Karnataka Forest Act has been shown. The petitioner seeks bail asserting innocence and being the sole breadwinner of his family. The prosecution argues habitual offenses and risk of fleeing from justice. (Paras 2-10)

(B) Bail Principles - The court considers the nature of the offence, status of the petitioner, and likelihood of tampering with witnesses. Identifying that the report of seizure was not made in compliance with statutory requirements, the apprehension does not meet the threshold to deny bail. (Paras 10-11)

Findings of Court:
The court grants bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigating agency and prevent further offences.

Result: Criminal Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. facts regarding the arrest and charges against accused no.2. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments for and against bail application. (Para 4 , 5)
3. legal framework and prima facie case for bail requirement. (Para 6 , 7 , 10)
4. details regarding mandatory reporting and confiscation under karnataka forest act. (Para 8 , 9)
5. considerations for granting bail. (Para 11)

ORDER :

1. Heard Sri. Vidyashankar G. Dalwai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for the respondent-State.

2. The petitioner-accused No.2 has filed this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) to grant bail in favour of the petitioner in connection with FOC No.220/2024-25 for the offences punishable under Sections 24(e), 84, 86, 87, 62 and 71(A) of the KARNATAKA FOREST ACT , 1963, Rule 144 of KARNATAKA FOREST RULES , 1969 and Section 303 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

On 16.03.2025, the first informant viz., Forest Officer, Dundasi Forest received information about transportation of sandalwood, went in search of illegal transportation of sandalwood and found three persons carrying sandalwood.

Therefore, he tried to apprehend them. However, two of them escaped and one of them was apprehended along with nine pieces of sandalwood weighing 74.530 kg. and two wheeler etc. Hence, the Forest Officer brought accused No.3 and the seized properties to the office of Forest Range, Dundasi and furnished information. This led to registration of FIR and initiation of investigation. During the course of investigation, on the statement of accused No.3, the names of accused Nos.1 and 2 were revealed. Apprehending the arrest by the Police, the petitioner – accused No.2 has filed this petition.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent, he has not committed any offence and he is a law abiding citizen. The RFO has not complied Sections 62 (3) and 71-A of the said Act; the petitioner is the sole bread earner of his family and he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the learned counsel prayed for grant of bail.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender; he has been involved in forest offences and the Investigating Officer has seized in all 74.530 kg. of sandalwood and it has caused loss to the State ex-chequer. If he is released on bail, he may commit similar offences and he may flee away from justice. Thus, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of bail petition.

6. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that on 16.03.2025, the Forest Officer, Dundasi Forest seized 9 pieces of sandalwood billets weighing 74.530 kg, from the possession of accused No.3, when he was transporting the same on his motorcycle without any license. While the Forest Officer was searching the vehicle, accused No.3 was found with said sandalwood billets along with the motorcycle. As per the contents of FIR, the accused Nos.1 to 3 have committed theft of sandalwood trees from the forest area.

7. Section 104-D of the KARNATAKA FOREST ACT is a special provision regulating bail matters in respect of offences under the KARNATAKA FOREST ACT . As per said Section the accused seeking bail for the offences committed under Sections 86 and 87 of KARNATAKA FOREST ACT , the accused has to satisfy the Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that they are not guilty of the said offences. In the instant case, accused No.3 was traveling on the motorcycle and as per the allegation he was transporting the sandalwood billets weighing 74.530 Kgs., in his motorcycle with having knowledge and conscious of possession of sandalwood billets in his Car. Therefore, there is prima facie case against the accused persons of the offence punishable under Section 87 of KARNATAKA FOREST ACT . A perusal of