The High Court of Karnataka has expressed shock over the action of the Forest Department in registering a criminal case against an Assistant Commissioner (AC) of the Revenue Department for passing a quasi-judicial order describing certain land as ‘Government Gomal’ against the claim made by the Forest Department that it was ‘forestland’.
“What shocks the conscience of the court is the Forest Department registering a crime for the performance of the AC’s quasi-judicial functions. As an Assistant Commissioner, looking into the records, he has passed an order, not bartering away the forestland to private entity, but observing it as a ‘Sarkari Gomala’ under the Revenue Department,” the court observed.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order while allowing a petition filed by B.A. Jagadeesh, the then AC of Hassan sub-division, who is now working as Project Director, Hassan District Urban Development Cell.
The complaint before the Hassan judicial magistrate was lodged by IFoS officer Saurabh Kumar, the then Deputy Conservator of Forests, Hassan territorial division, in 2024.
AC’s order
The AC passed the order on January 5, 2022, declaring certain land, situated in Tyavalli village, Shanthigrama hobli, Hassan taluk, as ‘Sarkari (government) gomal’ land and was being used by many persons to access their private land. Stating that the land was ‘government gomal’ in the Records of Tenancy and Rights (RTC) for many years, but was classified as ‘forest’ in the recent RTCs, but the Forest Department had not produced documents based on which the RTC entries were changed.
However, the Hassan Deputy Commissioner, on an appeal filed by the Forest Department, passed a quasi-judicial order asking the AC to consider the issue afresh giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Forest Department.
Interestingly, the Forest Department, soon after the Deputy Commissioner remanded the issue back to the AC, registered the criminal complaint on January 27, 2024, against the petitioner, who was by then not holding the post of AC, Hassan sub-division.
“After having filed an appeal and securing an order of remand to consider the issue afresh, it did not lie with the Forest Department to register a crime against the petitioner for having performed his quasi-judicial functions, unless it is found the exercise of such function is laced with criminality and foundationed on mens rea,” the court observed while noticing that the petitioner had not given the land to any private persons but had termed as land belonging to the Revenue Department on noticing that they were used for cattle grazing for ages.
Miscarriage of justice
Allowing continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner in such circumstances would result in the miscarriage of justice and become an abuse of the process of the law, the court said while quashing the complaint. The criminal case against the petitioner was registered for alleged violation of the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
Published – July 16, 2025 08:44 pm IST
