Karnataka High Court
Mundavadad Ramesha S/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406
CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102868 OF 2024
(482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
MUNDAVADAD RAMESHA S/O CHANDRASHEKARAPPA,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. NEAR SOGI CIRCLE, HADAGALI TOWN,
HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-586 127.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY HADAGALI POLICE STATION,
HOOVINAHADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-580 011,
R/BY ADDL. S.P.P., HIGH COURT PREMISES,
DHARWAD-580 011.
2. VIJAYA KRISHNA P.S.I.,
LAW AND ORDER, HADAGALI P.S.,
HOOVINAHADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-586 127,
R/BY ADDL. S.P.P., HIGH COURT PREMISES,
DHARWAD-580 011.
Digitally signed
by RAKESH S
... RESPONDENTS
RAKESH HARIHAR
S Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
HARIHAR KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN HADAGALI P.S. CRIME
NO.173/2023 AND FILING CHARGE-SHEET AND PERUSING THE
CHARGE-SHEET, TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 9B OF EXPLOSIVE ACT AND UNDER SECTION 286 OF
IPC BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HADAGALI ON THE
CHARGE-SHEET FILED BY THE PSI HADAGALI P.S. IN C.C.
NO.852/2024 (CRIME NO.173/2023) IN ACCUSED/PETITIONER IS
CONCERNED AND ALLOW THE CRIMINAL PETITION, IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406
CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER
IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. The petitioner is before this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 852 of 2024 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Hadagali, arising out of Crime No. 173 of 2023 registered by the Hadagali Police Station, for offences punishable under Section 286 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and Section 9B of the Explosives Act, 1884 (for short the Act, 1884).
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the total quantity of explosives found in the shop of the petitioner was 53 kgs. He refers to Sub-rule (9) of Rule 9 of the Explosives Rules, 2008 (for short the Rules, 2008), and submits that license under Rule 7 of the Rules, 2008 is required only for possession and sale of explosives, crackers, and sparklers exceeding 100 kgs. He submits that Section 9B of the Act 1884 can be invoked -3- NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406 CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024 HC-KAR whenever there is possession and sale of explosives without a license, or if the license conditions are violated. He also submits that the necessary ingredients to invoke Section 286 of the Indian Penal Code are not found in the present case, and only for extraneous reasons the petitioner has been implicated in the criminal proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP, who has opposed the petition, submits that the petitioner has not taken sufficient precautionary measures for possession and sale of crackers and sparklers in his shop. It is under these circumstances, after the crackers and sparklers found in his shop were seized, FIR has been registered against him for the aforesaid offences. She accordingly prays to dismiss the petition.
5. Material on record would go to show that, based on credible information that the petitioner without holding any license under the Act, 1884 was in possession of crackers and sparklers in his shop during the Deepavali festival, a raid was conducted to his shop and a total quantity of 53 kgs of explosives, including crackers, sparklers, flower pots, etc., were seized under a panchanama, and thereafter, FIR was registered -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406 CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024 HC-KAR for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner. After competing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner for the said offences, and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
6. Undisputedly, the total quantity of explosives seized from the possession of the petitioner, which he had kept for sale in his shop, is 53 kgs. Rule 7 of the Rules, 2008, provides that no person shall manufacture, import, export, transport, possess for sale or use an explosive, except as authorized or licensed under the said Rules.
7. Sub Rule 9 of Rule 9 provides that in cases where possession and sale from a shop of amorces and sparklers in quantity not exceeding 100 kilogram license is not required.
8. Section 9B of the Act, 1884, provides for punishment in a case where there is contravention of the Rules made under Section 5, or the conditions of the license granted under the said Rules. A reading of Section 5 along with Section 9B of the Act, 1884, would make it very clear that only in cases where possession and sale of explosives is found without license, and in -5- NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406 CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024 HC-KAR cases where there is a violation of the license which is granted, in such cases, the offence punishable under Section 9B of the Act, 1884 gets attracted.
9. In the case on hand, since the quantity of explosives found in possession of the petitioner for sale, is less than 100 kgs, as provided under Rule 9(9) of the Rules, 2008, he is not required to obtain a license under Rule 7 of the Rules, 2008. Therefore, the offence punishable under Section 9B of the Act, 1884 could not have been attracted against the petitioner.
10. Section 286 of IPC reads as follows:
"Section 286 - Negligent conduct with respect to explosive substance. - Whoever does, with any explosive substance, any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, Or knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any explosive substance in his possession as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life from that substance, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both."-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406 CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024 HC-KAR
11. There is no such allegation in the First Information or in the charge sheet that the petitioner had done any such act, rashly or negligently, which would have endangered human life or was likely to cause hurt or injury to any person.
12. In the case on hand, the petitioner was found in possession of explosives namely crackers, sparklers, and flower pots, etc., which were meant for sale during Deepavali festival. The necessary ingredients to invoke Section 286 of IPC is not found either in the First Information or in the charge sheet. The only allegation is that the petitioner was in possession of the explosives meant for sale, without he taking precautionary measures for the same. However, there is no mention of any such specific precautionary measures which was complied with by the petitioner. There is only an omnibus allegation that precautionary measures were not taken by the petitioner for possession and sale of the explosives found in the shop.
13. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that continuation of the impugned criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Accordingly, the following: -7-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11406 CRL.P No. 102868 of 2024 HC-KAR ORDER
i) The criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The entire proceedings in C.C. No. 852 of 2024 pending on the file of the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Hadagali, arising out of Crime No. 173 of 2023, registered by Hadagali Police Station, for the offences punishable under Section 286 of IPC and Section 9B of the Explosives Act, 1884, are hereby quashed against petitioner.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE VB CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 54