IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 24835 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN: MR. SAGAR S/O. LATE MR. MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 80, NEXT TO ESHWAR TEMPLE, KOMMAGATTA, SULIKERE POST, BENGALURU-560 060.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJ R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BENGALURU, Digitally REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, signed by LAKSHMI T HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, Location:

BENGALURU-560 001.

High Court of Karnataka

2. MR. ASHOK THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, BENGALURU RANGE, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 12/08/2021 FILED BY R2 ( ANNEXURE-A) THE RESULTANT FOC/F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.25/2021 DATED 22.12.2021 (ANNEXURE-A1) AND THE CHARGE SHEET FILED IN CC NO. 20483/2022 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 2(2), (16), (31), (32), (36), SECTIONS 9, 39, 44, 48, 48A, 49B READ WITH SECTIONS 51, 55, 56, 58(C) AND (J) AND THE WILDLIFE PROTECTION ACT, 1972, PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE XXXIX ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU (ANNX-A2).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is aggrieved by the registration of the case against him in FOC.No.25/2021 by the Range Forest Officer, for violation of Sections 2(2) (16) (31) (32) (36), 9, 39, 40, 44, 48, 48A, 49B read with 50, 51, 55, 56, 58(C) (J) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

2. It is alleged that petitioner was found in possession of certain skulls and horns of the wild animals, which were seized from him under a mahazar on

12.08.2021.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the investigation has been conducted, in violation of Section 50 and 50(8) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. He contended that under similar circumstances, this Court in Crl.P.No.10873/2023 has quashed the proceedings.

4. According to prosecution, on 12.08.2021 at about 01.15 p.m., on receiving a credible information, the first informant i.e., the In-charge Range Forest Officer and other Forest Officials went to the spot and apprehended the petitioner near one Bharat Restaurant, BEL main road and from his possession seized the skull with antlers of a Deer (stag). After conducting the seizure panchanama, a case was registered against the petitioner.

5. Admittedly, on receiving the credible information, no case was registered. On the other hand, the Forest Officials have gone to the spot and arrested the petitioner and seized the articles. Under similar circumstances, this Court in Crl.P.No.10873/2023, disposed on 17.11.2023 has allowed the petition, observing that search having been conducted in violation of Sub-Section (8) of Section 50 vitiates the proceedings.

6. The procedure followed in the case for conducting search and seizure being not in accordance with law, the proceedings would stand vitiated.

Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

(i) Petition is allowed (ii) The entire proceedings against the petitioner pending in C.C.No.20483/2022, on the file of the XXXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is quashed.

(iii) Notwithstanding the quashing of the proceedings, the recovery of articles allegedly affected from the petitioner shall remain in the custody of the State.

Sd/-

(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 84