Karnataka High Court
Shekarappa S/O Basappa Kamatar vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 November, 2024
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
CRL.P No. 102542 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102542 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SHEKARAPPA
S/O BASAPPA KAMATAR
AGE. 38 YEARS,
OCC.: AGRICULTURE,
RESIDING AT: NEAR CHINCHALI HOUSE,
VAKKALAGERI ONI,
GADAG - 582 101.
2. MEGHJI
S/O VISANJI NIRMAL
AGE. 52 YEARS,
OCC.: BUSINESS
RESIDING AT: NEAR CDO JAIN SCHOOL ROAD,
Digitally signed
by NAGAVENI GADAG - 582 103.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. VIJAYAKUMAR
S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR MATTI
AGE. 31 YEARS,
OCC.:BUSINESS,
RESIDING AT: NALAWAD GALLI
GADAG - 582 101.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
CRL.P No. 102542 of 2024
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
GADAG TOWN POLICE STATION,
DIST. GADAG
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
AT: DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C.,(528 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE
COGNIZANCE AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE
ACCUSED NOS.3, 6 AND 7/PETITIONERS IN CC NO.831/2021
(ARISING OUT OF GADAG TOWN POLICE STATION CRIME NO.
0057/2020) PENDING BEFORE THE I ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC 1ST COURT AT GADAG FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 3 AND
7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955 AND U/S 420 OF
IPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
CRL.P No. 102542 of 2024
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question
the proceedings in C.C. No. 831/2021 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential
Commodities Act and Section 420 of the IPC.
2. The learned counsel Sri.Gouri Shankar Mot appearing
for the petitioners submits that the issue in the lis stands
covered by judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in Criminal
Petition No.200423/2023, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has
held as follows:
"The petitioners have been charge-sheeted for the
offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and under Section 18 of
the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution
System) Control Order, 1992, alleging that, they had
stacked the food grains in their house meant for
distribution under the public distribution system in their
possession without authorization.
2. The learned Magistrate, after accepting the
charge sheet, took the cognizance of the aforesaid
offences, and issued summons.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that, conducting of search and seizure of the food grains
stacked in the house belonging to the accused is in
violation of Clause (2) of Rule 19 of the Control Order,
2016.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
4. The learned High Court Government Pleader
submits that, the charge-sheet material clearly discloses
that, the petitioners accused had stacked the food grains
meant for distribution under Public Distribution System
(for short PDS') unauthorizedly and the learned
Magistrate, after perusing the charge sheet, has rightly
taken the cognizance of the aforesaid offences, and the
same does not warrant any interference.
5. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel
for the petitioners - accused and the learned High Court
Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
6. The State Government, In exercise of power
conferred under sub-Section (5) of Section 24 of the
National Food Security Act, 2013, framed Rules called as
Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution
(Control) Order, 2016.
7. Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016 deals with
powers of entry, search, seizure etc. The Food Inspector
is one of the Officer authorized to conduct search and
seizure. Clause (2) of Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016
specifies that, the provisions of Section 100 of Cr.P.C.
relating to search and seizure shall so far may be apply to
searches and seizures under this Clause.
8. Section 100 of Cr.P.C. specifies that whenever any
place liable to search or inspection under Chapter VII is
closed, any person residing in, or being in charge of, such
place shall on demand of the officer or other person
executing the warrant, and on production of the warrant,
allow him free ingress thereto, and afford all reasonable
facilities for a search therein.
9. Section 100 of Cr.PC specifically prescribes that,
search of premises can be conducted by a person
executing the warrant. In the instant case, the Food
Inspector has conducted search and seizure without
obtaining a warrant as required under Section 94 of
Cr.PC. Hence, the search and seizure conducted is in
violation of Clause (2) of Rule 19 of the Control Order,
2019.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
10. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.36438-439/2014 and W.P.No.36542/2014 (GM-
EC) disposed of on 03.12.2014, at Para No.14, has held
as under:-
"14. In the instant case, petitioners are not
authorized dealers. They are not shown to be engaged in
purchase, storage or sale of food grains which were
issued to the authorized dealer for distribution under the
public distribution system. Therefore, essential ingredient
explicitly stated under Clause 18 (a) i.e., the goods /
commodities must have been issued to the authorized
dealer under the public distribution system is missing. No
finding is recorded by the 1st respondent in this regard.
In fact, there is no material whatsoever to indicate this
aspect. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, unless there is material to
show that the commodities were issued to an authorized
dealer for distribution under the public distribution system
or that a person other than the authorized dealer had
sought to purchase or sell or store or offer for sale food
grains meant for distribution under public distribution
system through the price depots, prohibition contained
under Clause 18 (a) of the Control Order would not be
attracted. In the absence of such findings such action will
not attract penal measure including seizure or forfeiture."
11. The prosecution has not placed any material
that, the food grains seized from the possession of the
accused was meant for distribution under the Public
Distribution System. In the absence of any corroborative
material, the continuation of the criminal proceedings
against the petitioners - accused herein, will be an abuse
of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:"
3. The learned Additional Government Advocate would
not dispute the position in law, as is laid down by the co-
ordinate Bench supra.
4. The issue in the lis is also akin to what is decided by
the co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid lis. The petitioners are
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16393
dragged into the web of crime only on the voluntary statement
rendered by the co-accused and there is no corroborative
material against the petitioners. Therefore, I deem it
appropriate to follow the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate
Bench and the reasons noted therein, to allow the subject
petition as well.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.831/2021
pending on the file of the I Addl. Civil Judge
and JMFC I Court, Gadag qua the petitioner
stands quashed."
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
BKP
