Karnataka High Court
Sri Shaik Markhum Ahmed vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 August, 2016
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4233 OF 2016
Between:
1. Sri.Shaik Markhum Ahmed,
S/o. Shaik Noor,
Aged about 45 years,
1st Cross, R.T.Nagar,
Tumkur - 572 101.
District- Tumkur.
2. Sri. Nayaz Ahmed,
S/o. Sri.Nazeer Ahmed,
Aged about 35 years,
R/o. Santhepet,
Tumkur - 572 101.
District - Tumkur.
...Petitioners
(By Shri S.P.Kulkarni, Advocate)
And:
The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Challakere Police,
Challakere Taluk,
Chitradurga District,
2
Now represented by State P.P.,
High Court of Karnataka Building,
Bangalore - 560 001. ...Respondent
(By Shri Chetan Desai, HCGP)
---
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section
482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash the complaint dated
16.05.2016 FIR/Cr.No.230/2016 filed by the respondent by
Challakere P.S., Challakere, Chitradurga within the
jurisdiction of the Prl.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC,
Challakere being arbitrary and opposed to Law.
This Petition coming on for admission this day, the
Court made the following:-
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The learned State Public Prosecutor is directed to take notice for the respondent and is heard.
2. The petition is coming on for admission, is considered for final disposal. It is the case of the petitioners that there is a false complaint to the effect that they have been found in possession of large quantity of rice belonging to fair price depots and that they were transporting rice and other 3 foodgrains belonging to Anna Bhagya Scheme of Karnataka Government and that they were in the process of selling the said foodgrains to make illegal gains and that the mandatory provisions of Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 had been violated and apart from having committed offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is in this background, the two lorries bearing Nos.KA-52-A-8856 and KA-16-A-3209 and the foodgrains which were being carried in the two lorries have been seized by the respondent police.
3. As on 16.5.2016 a case has been registered in Crime No.230/2016 by the Sub-Inspector, Challakere Police Station, Challakere, within the jurisdiction of the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Challakere and therefore the petitioners are before this Court.
4. The learned counsel Sri S.P.Kulkarni would contend that insofar as enforcement of the Essential Commodities 4 Act is concerned, there are specific provisions under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992, which are applicable to the present case on hand. Paragraph 19 thereof provides as follows:
19. Powers of Entry, Search, Seizure, etc.:
(1) The Director of Food and Civil Supplies, the Joint Directors of Food and Civil Supplies, or the Tahsildar of a taluk, and Authorized Authority or any other officer of the Department of Food and Civil Supplies not below the rank of a Food Inspector within their jurisdiction may with such assistance, if any, as he thinks fit and if he has reason to believe that there is or has been any contravention of the provisions of this order or with a view to securing compliance with this order or to satisfying himself that there is or has been any contravention of the order:
(a) require the owner, occupier or any other person in charge of any place, premises, 5 vehicle or vessel in which he has reason to believe that any contravention of the provisions of this order or of the conditions of any authorization issued there under has been, is being or is about to be committed, to produce any books, accounts or other documents showing transactions relating to such contraventions:
(b) enter, inspect or break open and search any place or premises, vehicle or vessel in which he has reason to believe that any contravention of the provisions of this order or of the conditions of any authorization issued there under has been, is being or is about to be committed;
(c) take or cause to be taken extracts from or copies of any documents showing transactions relating to such contraventions which are produced before him;
(d) search, seize and remove books, accounts and other documents and stocks of essential commodity and the animals vehicles, vessels 6 or other conveyance used in carrying the said essential commodities in contravention of the provisions of this order, or of the conditions of the authorization issued there under and thereafter take or authorize the taking of all measures necessary for securing the production of stocks, of essential commodity and the animals, vehicles, vessels or other conveyance so seized, in a Court for their safe custody pending such production.
(2) The provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974) relating to search and seizure shall so far may be, apply to searches and seizures under this clause."
5. The learned counsel would therefore contend that from the tenor of the above stated Section, the mechanism for regulating and enforcing the Essential Commodities Act and the prevention of any such illegal transaction or sale of foodgrains is under the power and control of officers 7 authorized by the State Government and the said powers cannot be enforced or exercised by police, as in the present case on hand the entire action of the police authorities is illegal and without jurisdiction and the seizure of the foodgrains which are now kept in the open space are susceptible and certainly would cause loss to the petitioners and therefore would submit on the sole ground that the seizure search and seizure of foodgrains has been made illegal and without jurisdiction, the entire proceedings ought to be quashed and the goods be released in favour of the petitioners.
6. The learned State Public Prosecutor would concede that the said regularization namely The Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 does prescribe the Authority or the Officers who could carry out search and seizure of foodgrains to which the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and other alike provisions would apply 8 and that the seizure by the police was without authority cannot be the glaring circumstance.
7. The petition is summarily allowed. The proceedings initiated and the seizure carried out are held to be illegal and quashed. The goods which have been detained by the police have been released in favour of the petitioners.
Sd/-
JUDGE AP