Sri Sayed Mazar @ Mazar vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Feb 17, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1565252

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1565252
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: M.Nagaprasanna
Decided On: Feb 17, 2026
Case Number: CRL.P/11609/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sri Sayed Mazar @ Mazar

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....the entire criminal proceedings initiated as against the petitioner (accused no.3) in s.c.no.74/2022 (crime no.20/2019) pending on the file of the ii addl. district and sessions judge court at mysuru for the offence punishable under section 86, 87 of karnataka forest act in the interest of justice and equity." -3-2. heard sri.gaurav subramanyam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, sri.b.n.jagadeesha, learned addl. spp appearing for respondent no.1 and have perused the material on record.3. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner wouldsubmit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgmentrendered by the coordinate bench of this court in crl.p.no.5845 of 2024 disposed on 10.03.2025, wherein it hasheld as follows:"1. the petitioner, who is being prosecuted for offences punishable under sections 86 and 87 of the karnataka forest act, has approached this court seeking relief.2. the prosecution alleges that the petitioner was found in possession of 16 kg of sandalwood billets without a permit.3. the learned counsel for the petitionersubmitted that, under section 62a of the karnataka forest act, the investigation of an offence punishable under sections 86 and 87 can be conducted only by an officer not below the rank of range forest officer. therefore, the investigation conducted by the police inspector, culminating in the filing of the charge sheet, is vitiated, as the police inspector lacks the authority to investigate an offence under the act. -4-4. in response, the learned high courtgovernment pleader for the respondent-state submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of 16 kg of sandalwood billets without a permit. he argued that the veracity of the allegation should be considered at trial and cannot be examined in this petition. accordingly, he sought the dismissal of the petition.5. the arguments of the learned counsel for both parties have been duly considered.6. section 62a of the karnataka forest.....

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11609 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. SAYED MAZAR @ MAZAR, S/O SAYED MAMUD, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.3333/2, NEAR FIRDOUS FUNCTION HALL, PULIKESHI ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GAURAV SUBRAMANYAM, ADVOCATE)

Digitally AND: signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, Location: High Court of BY NAZARBAD POLICE STATION , Karnataka MYSURU CITY, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.

2. SRI. SANTHRUPTH H. V.,

S/O LATE H.C.VISHNUMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, -2- GOPALAGOWDA SHANTHAWERI HOSPITAL, NAZARBAD CIRCLE, MYSORE CITY - 570 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.3) IN S.C.NO.74/2022 (CRIME NO.20/2019) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S/ 86, 87 OF KARNATAKA FOREST ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

"Quash the entire criminal proceedings initiated as against the petitioner (accused No.3) in S.C.No.74/2022 (Crime No.20/2019) pending on the file of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge Court at Mysuru for the offence punishable under section 86, 87 of Karnataka Forest Act in the interest of justice and equity." -3-

2. Heard Sri.Gaurav Subramanyam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1 and have perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment

rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5845 of 2024 disposed on 10.03.2025, wherein it has

held as follows:

"1. The petitioner, who is being prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 86 and 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act, has approached this Court seeking relief.

2. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner was found in possession of 16 kg of sandalwood billets without a permit.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that, under Section 62A of the Karnataka Forest Act, the investigation of an offence punishable under Sections 86 and 87 can be conducted only by an officer not below the rank of Range Forest Officer. Therefore, the investigation conducted by the Police Inspector, culminating in the filing of the charge sheet, is vitiated, as the Police Inspector lacks the authority to investigate an offence under the Act. -4-

4. In response, the learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent-State submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of 16 kg of sandalwood billets without a permit. He argued that the veracity of the allegation should be considered at trial and cannot be examined in this petition. Accordingly, he sought the dismissal of the petition.

5. The arguments of the learned counsel for both parties have been duly considered.

6. Section 62A of the Karnataka Forest Act,

1963, states that any Forest Officer not below the rank of a Range Forest Officer may, with regard to offences under this Act, exercise the powers conferred on an officer in charge of a police station under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, only a Range Forest Officer or an officer of higher rank is authorized to conduct an investigation into offences under the Karnataka Forest Act.

7. In the present case, the investigation was

conducted by a Police Inspector, who is not authorized under Section 62A of the Karnataka Forest Act, and the charge sheet was submitted by him. Consequently, the cognizance taken of the offence based on the final report submitted by the police is without authority. Under such circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings would constitute an abuse of the process of law.

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No. 225/1991, pending before the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore, are hereby quashed. " -5-

4. In the light of the order passed by this Court (supra) and for the reasons aforementioned, the following:

ORDER

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

(ii) The proceedings in S.C.No.74/2022 (Crime

No.20/2019) pending before the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge Court at Mysuru, stand quashed, qua the petitioner. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 3 Sl No.: 12

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2026 Same Parties Sri Sayed Mazar @ Mazar vs State of Karnataka Same Judge M.Nagaprasanna