Karnataka High Court
Sri.Yallappa Gangappa ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 January, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawazpresided Bymnj
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100104 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
SRI. YALLAPPA GANGAPPA KANAJANAVAR,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCC: GROCERY BUSINESS,
R/O: YADAWAD VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: DHARWAD. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI NEELENDRA D. GUNDE ADV. FOR
SRI SANTOSH MANE, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
DCRB, DHARWAD,
REPRESENTED BY THE SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT DHARWAD.
2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
NAVANAGAR DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397
R/W SECTION 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
LOWER COURT RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 31.12.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.81/2018
WHEREBY CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2013
PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO.292/2013 IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has called in question the legality and
correctness of the order dated 31.12.2018 passed by the
learned IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad in
Crl.A.No.81/2018 and the order dated 28.09.2018 passed
by the authorized officer and Deputy Commissioner of
Excise-respondent no.2.
2. On 31.12.2013, Indica car bearing registration
No.KA-28/MA 6685 was intercepted by the Police
Inspector, DCRB, Dharwad and his staff, in which two
bags, one containing 12 bottles of knockout Kingfisher
beer of 650ml and another bag containing 25 Kingfisher
strong Premium 330 ml tins was being transported. Since,
the said contraband was being transported without any
permit or pass, the car was seized and a case in Crime
No.292/2013 was registered for offences punishable under
Sections 32, 34 and 38A of Karnataka Excise Act.
Petitioner is the registered owner of the car.
3. The authorized officer and Deputy Commissioner of
Excise, Navanagar, Dharwad by an order dated 28.09.2018
confiscated the said car. The said order was challenged by
the petitioner by filing an appeal before the Sessions
Court. The said appeal came to be dismissed vide order
dated 31.12.2018.
4. At the outset, it is relevant to mention that learned
Sessions Judge has clubbed two appeals viz. Crl.A.No.81
and 82/2018 and passed a common order. The instant
revision petition is arising out of Crl.A.No.81/2018.
5. It is pertinent to see that Crl.A.No.82/2018 is
nowhere connected to the incident in question. On the
other hand, it pertains to a separate incident wherein a
Tata Ace vehicle was found transporting liquor on
29.11.2015, in respect of which a case in Crime
No.12/2015-16 was registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 32, 34, 38A and Section 43A of Karnataka
Excise Act, 1956. Separate proceedings were held before
the authorized officer and the said vehicle was confiscated.
Hence, the learned Sessions Judge was not proper in
clubbing both the appeals arising out of two different
orders passed by the authorized officer pertaining to two
different incidents and passing a common order.
6. Be that as it may, appellants have raised a
contention that the procedure laid down under Section 53
of the Karnataka Excise Act has not been followed and in
support of the said contention, relied on several decisions,
as noted in para-5 of the judgment. No proper discussion
has been made with regard to the decisions relied upon.
The learned Sessions Judge holding that the appellants
have failed to show that they have no knowledge about the
vehicle involved in the crime, proceeded to pass the
impugned order.
7. It cannot be said that the impugned order passed by
the learned Sessions Judge is in accordance with law and
therefore, it is just and proper to remit the matter back to
the Sessions Court to consider Crl.A.No.81/2018 afresh
and to pass a separate order in accordance with law.
Hence, the following:
ORDER
Revision petition is allowed.
The order dated 31.12.2018 passed by the Court of
IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, insofar as
dismissing Crl.A.No.81/2018 is hereby set aside. The
matter is remitted back to the learned Sessions Court to
consider Crl.A.No.81/2018 afresh and to pass order in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HMB
