Karnataka High Court
Gururaj S/O Shekhappa Vasanad vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2023
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249
CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102129 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. GURURAJ S/O SHEKHAPPA VASANAD,
AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O HIREHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. BYADGI
& DIST. HAVERI-581106.
2. PAVAN S/O MUTTAPPA VASANAD,
AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HIREHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. BYADGI
& DIST. HAVERI-581106.
3. PRADEEP S/O SHIVANAGOUDA IRANAGOUDRA,
AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HIREHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. BYADGI
& DIST. HAVERI-581106.
VISHAL ... PETITIONERS
NINGAPPA (BY SRI. NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADVOCATE)
PATTIHAL
AND:
Digitally signed by
VISHAL NINGAPPA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
PATTIHAL THROUGH EXCISE POLICE STATION,
Date: 2023.09.23 BYADGI,
12:49:34 +0530 R/BY ITS
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
DHARWAD.
2. EXCISE INSPECTOR,
EXCISE INSPECTOR OFFICE,
BYADGI SUB-DIVISION, BYADGI-581106,
R/BY ITS ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249
CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN FIR
NO.185/2022 23/2110IE/211010, OF EXCISE POLICE STATION
BYADGI. BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/S 11, 14, 32(1), 38(A) AND 43(A) OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT,
1965 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, BYADGI SO FOR IT RELATES TO THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO
3/PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in FIR No.185/2022- 23/2110IE/211010 of Excise Police Station, Byadagi, for the offences punishable under Sections 11, 14, 32(1), 38(A) and 43(A) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965.
2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Naveen Chatrad appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for respondent No.1.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they were found in possession of 1.35 litres of whisky, -3- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249 CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023 which according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, is within the permissible limit of such holding.
4. The issue need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. This Court in Criminal Petition No.5650/2021 disposed on 16.09.2022, has held as follows:
" The petitioner is before this Court calling in question proceedings in Crime No.31/2020-21 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 14, 32, 38(A) and 43(A) of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).
2. Heard Sri.M.R.C. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.S.Abhijith, learned HCGP for respondent No.1.
3. The brief facts that leads the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition as borne out from the pleadings are as follows:
On 09.03.2021, the Anti Corruption Bureau claiming to be on receipt of some incredible information, conducted a search in the house of the petitioner and finding nothing that would become offence punishable under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, informed the Department of Excise that the petitioner was in possession of 34.55 litres of liquor at his house and that would be in violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Excise Act. It is then the Department of Excise -4- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249 CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023 initiates proceedings based upon the search so conducted by the Anti Corruption Bureau and registers the crime on the ground that the petitioner was in possession of 34.55 litres of branded liquor in his house. It is the registration of the crime that drives the petitioner to this Court in the subjectpetition.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri.M.R.C.Manohar, would contend that in terms of Rule 21 of Karnataka Excise (Possession, Transport, Import and Export of Intoxicants) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short) one person in a house is entitled to store 9.1 litres of Foreign Liquor and 2.3 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) and would submit that the members in the house are four and the liquour that was found in the possession of the petitioner was 34.55 litres and therefore, would come within the parameters so laid down under the aforesaid Rule 21 of the Rules.
5. Learned HCGP would however, seek to justify the action of search and contend that the premises could be searched without a warrant in terms of the Act, but is not in a position to dispute that the Rule 21 of the aforesaid Rules would permit 9.1 litres of liquor to be in possession of a person.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1.
7. Rule 21 of the Karnataka Excise (Possession, Transport, Import and Export of Intoxicants) Rules, 1967 reads as under:
"21. Case where permit or licence is not required.- No permit or licence, under these rules, shall be required for the possession or transport of the following quantities of liquors.
-5- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249 CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023 Liquor Quantity 1 Toddy, in such areas of the 2.5 Litres State where the sale of toddy to public is allowed under sub-rule (4) of Rule 3 of the Karnataka Excise (Tapping of Trees) Rules, 1991 2 xxxxx 3 xxxxx 4 Country Beer 18.2 litres 5 Brandy, Whisky, Gin, Rum, 2.3 litres Milk- Punch and such other liquors manufactured in Karnataka State or manufactured in other places in India and imported to Karnataka State, excluding Foreign liquors (imported) 6 Foreign liquors (imported) 9.1 litres 7 Denatured Spirit 750 mililitres 8 xxxx 9 Wines (including mass wine 9.0 litres andsacramental wine) 10 Fortified Wine 4.5 litres
8. The afore narrated facts are not in dispute. The Rules afore quoted clearly permit a person to hold 9.1 litre of liquor in his house. The members of the family of the petitioner, as explained in memorandum of petition are four in number. A four member family in a house, wouldbe entitled to store liquor upto 36.4 litres. The possession of the petitioner is admittedly at 34.55 litres which is within the permissible limit even in terms of the Rules. Therefore, without going into any of the legal contentions that is advanced by the petitioner, it would suffice to allow the petition on the facts obtaining in the case at hand as admittedly the petitioner was in possession of the liquor which was permissible under Rule 21 of the Rules.-6-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10249 CRL.P No. 102129 of 2023 For the aforesaid reasons, petition is allowed. Proceedings in Crime No.31/2020-21 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 14, 32, 38(A) and 43(A) of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 are hereby quashed.
5. In the light of the possession of the liquor being within permissible limit, further proceedings if permitted to continue would become an abuse of the process of law.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER i. The criminal petition is allowed.
ii. The proceedings in FIR No.185/2022- 23/2110IE/211010 of Excise Police Station, Byadagi, stands quashed qua the petitioners.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kmv ct:bck