@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
S.N. Satyanarayana, J.@mdashThe petitioners herein are the complainants. The petitioners are said to be the owners of land bearing Sy. No. 124/4/B2 and Sy. No. 501/3 of Ujire village, Belthangady Taluk, D.K. District.
2. Brief facts leading to this petition are as under:
It is stated that at about 8.00 pm., on 9.5.2014 a group of persons headed by one Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody is said to have trespassed in to a portion of aforesaid land belonging to petitioners, which is arecanut plantation. While trespassing, they removed arecanut plantation to an extent of approximately 1 acre of land by cutting and removing 30 arecanut plants, 6 coconut trees and two jungle wood trees, to make space for construction of temple on the said land. It is stated that the prime accused in the complaint dated 10.5.2014 is one Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody, a rowdy sheeter of Belthangady police station. It is stated that the said accused is honorary president of Sri Nagabrhamma Sanidhya Jeernodhara Samithi, Kunjarpa (''Samithi'' for short). He along with several other people removed the trees on the aforesaid land between 8 pm., on 9.5.2014 and 3.15 am., on 10.5.2014 despite the resistance of petitioners and other members of their family stating that all the trees on the said land is being cleared for the purpose of constructing a temple thereon.
3. It is stated that on the morning of 10.5.2014 at about 10 ''O'' clock the petitioners along with their family members lodged a complaint against Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody and others with Belthangady Police. In the said complaint though the name of Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody is not referred to, it is stated that the office bearers of the Samithi trespassed in to their property and vandalized the trees with an intention of putting up a temple in the vacant land. Though a complaint was lodged with the fifth respondent i.e., the Station House Officer of Belthangady Police Station, no action was taken. It is stated that said fact was brought to the notice of fourth respondent-Circle Inspector of Police and thereafter to the Superintendent of Police, Dakshina Kannada District on 12.5.2014. Despite the fact that these persons were informed about the highhanded behavior of the members of the Samithi headed by Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody it is seen that neither the complaint was registered nor any action was taken to stop the further activities on the land.
4. It is stated that in the interregnum period of lodging the compliant on 10.5.2014 with fifth respondent and another complaint being given to third respondent on 12.5.2014, the construction of temple continued uninterrupted, later it was completed by 21.5.2015 and the President of the Samithi, namely Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody, who was facing a Non Bailable Warrant at that time and a wanted person by the police managed to inaugurate the said temple in the presence of police officials. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that it is only on 22.5.2014 the said Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody has secured Anticipatory Bail from coordinate bench of this Court. The grievance of the petitioners is that there is gross negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in not preventing highhanded act of the President of the Samithi in forcibly trespassing in to a portion of their property, removing the existing trees and thereafter constructing a temple, which has taken place almost within eleven days from the late evening of 9.5.2014 and completing by the morning on 21.5.2014. In all these days, despite the fact that there is a compliant lodged with fifth respondent-Belthangady police, instead of registering the F.I.R. pursuant to the complaint and investigating in to the matter, they went on gathering information by conducting enquiry whether the property referred to in the complaint belongs to the petitioners, which procedure is totally unknown to law and criminal jurisprudence.
5. It is necessary to place on record at this juncture that time and again the Apex Court as well as this Court have repeatedly come down heavily on the police that there is laxity in the police department in registering the complaint whenever it is lodged. In the instant case, there is deliberate inordinate delay in registering the complaint, thereby allowing the commission of criminal act to be completed by not taking any steps to stop the act of alleged crime by registering the complaint and investigating in to the complaint.
6. In this proceeding as admitted by respondent Nos. 3 to 5 the honorary President of Samithi is a rowdy sheeter as on the date when complaint was lodged against the members of the Samithi, which includes himself. That there was an order of Non Bailable Warrant against him, same was within the knowledge of Belthangady police. It is seen that despite the fact that a complaint is lodged against a person for whom Non Bailable Warrant is issued, the complaint was not registered and it was not investigated. On the contrary, a farce of enquiry is conducted by writing a letter to the Tahsildar of Belthangady seeking clarification regarding the title to the property, on which the act of trespass is said to have committed by the office bearers of Samithi. With this, this Court comes to the conclusion that the police have not registered the complaint either out of fear to the rowdy sheeter Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody or in a complacence they let him to do whatever he want. In any event complaint was not registered against Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody and others, on the contrary police leisurely went on to investigate the title to the land, which conduct of police this Court is unable to believe. The possibility is that they may be hand in glove with him for the reason that what is constructed is a temple and the police would have conveniently thought that no action need to be taken.
7. The resultant position in this episode is that the law abiding citizens are left to lurch without any assistance from the police, who is expected to come to their aid as and when complaint is taken to them alleging the act of trespass and vandalism in to their private property. Therefore, this Court feel that while considering this petition for the prayer sought by the petitioner, it is required that there should be a direction to the Belthangady police to register the case. While doing so, this Court also feel that the Superintendent of Police, Dakshina Kannada as well as the Circle Inspector of Police, Belthangady and the Sub-Inspector of Police, Belthangady who received the complaint on 10.5.2014 are equally guilty of inaction on their part in not taking any steps pursuant to the complaint lodged by the complainants/petitioners herein and allowing the act of trespass to be completed and the temple coming in to place instead of giving any assistance to stop the same.
8. The learned Additional SPP Sri Keshava Murthy, was facing an herculean task to substantiate the act of respondent Nos. 3 to 5. At one point of time, he had no other option but to concede that when compliant is filed, as directed by the Apex Court and this Court, the F.I.R. should have been registered by the Station House Officer, who received the complaint at 10 am., on 10.5.2014. Subsequently, the Circle Inspector who has come to know of said complaint also did not take any action. The learned Additional SPP further conceded that even the Superintendent of Police, Dakshina Kannada after receiving the complaint has simply passed it on to the Circle Inspector and thereafter has not taken any steps. In that view of the matter, this Court feel that there is total failure on the part of police department of Dakshina Kannada in allowing a rowdy sheeter to make mockery of the police system by not only trespassing in to somebody''s private property but also building a temple and inaugurating it, that too when the Non Bailable Warrant that was issued against him was still in force, he has the audacity to complete the act of Crime on 21.5.2014 and thereafter to secure an Anticipatory Bail from the coordinate bench of this Court on 22.5.2014, a copy of said order, which is passed in Crl. P. No. 2371/2014 disposed of on 22.5.2014 is placed before the court.
9. It is seen that in the said proceeding, the respondent is none other than the fifth respondent-Belthangady police. Despite the fact that serious allegations, referred to supra, are committed by him, none of them were brought to the notice of this Court to oppose the Anticipatory Bail when it was granted to him, is yet another thing, which is required to be looked in to. In this background, while allowing this petition the Belthangady police are hereby directed to register case against the office bearers of Samithi with Mr. Mahesh Shetty Thimarody as first accused in the said proceeding. It is also made clear that the Home Secretary, Government of Karnataka, shall keep the Superintendent of Police, Dakshina Kannada, Circle Inspector of Police, Belthangady Police Station and the Station House Officer, Belthangady Police Station, who were in charge of the Station on 10.5.2014 at 10.00 am., under suspension until the investigation is completed to ensure that there should not be any interference by these officers in the investigation, which is required to be conducted. The Home Secretary is also directed to entrust the matter to the Commissioner of Police, Mangalore to be investigated by him by forming a separate team.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this criminal petition is allowed.
