Case Note & Summary
The State of Karnataka, represented by the State Public Prosecutor, filed a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the order dated 20-02-2016 passed by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, in Criminal Revision Petition No.5036/2015. The Sessions Court had set aside the order dated 30-01-2014 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Puttur, taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 9, 39, 44, 49-B read with Section 51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, read with Section 71-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, in C.C.No.1210/2014 against the respondent-accused, Harris Mohammad. The State contended that the Sessions Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating the evidence at the stage of cognizance, where only a prima facie case is required. The High Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the revision petition, set aside the Sessions Court's order, and restored the Trial Court's order of taking cognizance, holding that the Sessions Court had erred in interfering with the cognizance order at a preliminary stage.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revisional Jurisdiction - Scope of Interference - The Sessions Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence at the stage of cognizance and setting aside the order of the Trial Court - Held that at the stage of taking cognizance, the court need only see whether a prima facie case is made out, and the Sessions Court ought not to have interfered with the order of cognizance (Paras 1-10). B) Wildlife Law - Cognizance of Offences - Sections 9, 39, 44, 49-B, 51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 - The Trial Court had taken cognizance of offences under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 read with Section 71-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 - Held that the material on record disclosed a prima facie case, and the Sessions Court's order setting aside cognizance was erroneous (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Court was justified in setting aside the Trial Court's order taking cognizance of offences under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision petition, set aside the order dated 20-02-2016 passed by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, in Criminal Revision Petition No.5036/2015, and restored the order dated 30-01-2014 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Puttur, taking cognizance of the offences.
Law Points
- Revisional jurisdiction
- Scope of interference with cognizance order
- Prima facie case
- Wildlife Protection Act
- Karnataka Forest Act
