Karnataka High Court
Yashwant vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906
CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201749 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. YASHWANT S/O GUNAJI
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O MUJAREWADI P. O.
TQ. PIMPALWANDI DIST. BEED,
MAHARASTRA-413229.
2. DEEPAK KOTHARI S/O RAMDAS KOTHARI,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O CTC NO.72A,
HOTHARI HOUSE, MITTAL
PARK LAYOUT NEAR GODREJ
Digitally signed
by RENUKA BUNGLAW, VILE PARLE WEST,
Location: HIGH MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA STATE-400056.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. SURYA PRAKASH PANDEY
S/O RAJ NARAYAN PANDEY,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O NO.68/3/1/65,
PRESTIGE DREAM VALLY,
SHIVARAMPALLY, RAJENDRANAGAR
SHIVARAMPALLY K.V.RANGAREDDY,
TELANGANA -500052.
4. MOHAMMED SUFWAN UL HAQ
S/O MOHAMMED JAVEED UL HAQ,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906
CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025
HC-KAR
R/O NO.7-2-134,
OPP. GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL,
CHITTA KHANA, BIDAR-585401.
5. MOHD GAYASUDDIN S/O MOHD GOSUDDIN,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O 2-5-160, PANSAL TALEEM
BIDAR-585401.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. LAKSHMI G.E., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THORUGH MEHAKAR PS
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL.
S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
AT KALABURAGI-585107.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ANITHA M. REDDY., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528
OF BNSS (NEW), UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.(OLD),
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.87/2025 FILED BY
MEHEKAR POLICE STATION BHALKI RURAL CIRCLE, BIDAR FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7 OF COPTA
(CIGARRETTES AND OTHER TOBACCO PRODUCTS ACT 2003)
AND UNDER SECTION 123, 318(4),190,275 OF BNSS PENDING
IN THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BHALKI,
BIDAR.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906
CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) This petition is filed seeking quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.87/2025, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of COPTA (Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003) and under Section 123, 318(4), 190, 275 of BNS 2023, pending on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhalki, Bidar.
2. Facts leading to the case are as under; On 21.09.2025, the Police Sub-Inspector received credible information regarding illegal transportation of pan masala and other tobacco products. Acting upon the said information, the PSI initiated vehicle checks and, during the process, intercepted the vehicle bearing registration No. 12 PQ 6140. Upon enquiry, it was revealed that the vehicle was being used for illegal transportation of pan masala and other tobacco products which allegedly belonged to the petitioners. Consequently, a crime was registered.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, has drawn the attention of this Court to various documents produced along with the petition. These include the Certificate of Registration of Trademark issued by the Government of India through the Trademarks Registry, Registration Certificates in Form GST REG-06 evidencing that the firm "RK Products" is duly registered under the GST laws, and the Udyam Registration Certificate establishing that the petitioners' firm is engaged in the manufacture of the very product that has been seized by the respondent-authorities. Additionally, the petitioners have produced tax invoices relating to the goods in transit and a Trademark Licence Agreement. According to learned counsel, these documents collectively demonstrate the lawful manufacture and business operations of the petitioners' firm.
4. Referring to the aforesaid material, learned counsel would further contend that the goods intercepted -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR and seized by the authorities bear a distinct pouch design and are duly covered under a registered trademark in accordance with the Trademarks Act, 1999. It is submitted that the petitioners' firm manufactures scented tobacco products marketed under the brand name 'SR-1' under a valid licence issued by the competent authority and is fully compliant with GST regulations. In this background, it is argued that the very registration of the FIR alleging illegal transportation of processed tobacco products is wholly misconceived and unsustainable. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners, being legitimate manufacturers and traders, have been unnecessarily dragged into criminal proceedings, and therefore continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process of law, warranting exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023.
5. Per contra, though the learned High Court Government Pleader has attempted to justify the initiation of criminal proceedings, after examining the documents -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR placed on record, this Court finds substantial merit in the contention of the petitioners. The additional documents produced clearly establish that the petitioners' firm holds a valid trademark licence for the product in question and is a newly registered entity authorised to manufacture and sell the seized goods. The seizure appears to have been effected without taking into consideration the statutory compliances already fulfilled by the petitioners.
6. When the petitioners' firm is demonstrably a duly registered manufacturing entity, holds the requisite licences, and the materials prima facie indicate strict compliance with GST norms, the very basis for registration of crime alleging illegal transportation of tobacco products becomes untenable. The record does not disclose any cogent material or foundational facts indicating commission of any cognizable offence. The seizure and registration of the FIR appear to be without authority of law and in the absence of any incriminating material. -7-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR
7. This Court has meticulously examined the allegations contained in the FIR as well as the statutory provisions invoked therein. Insofar as Section 7 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COPTA) is concerned, the said provision prohibits the manufacture, sale, distribution or trade of tobacco products except in the manner and with the health warnings prescribed under the Act. The material placed on record, however, clearly demonstrates that the petitioners' firm is a licensed manufacturer, fully compliant with packaging norms, statutory declarations, and GST regulations, and there is no allegation, much less material, to indicate that the seized products contravened any packaging or labelling requirements under COPTA. Likewise, the invocation of Sections 123, 318(4), 190 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is wholly misconceived. Section 123 pertains to adulteration or spurious goods causing harm, but the FIR does not allege adulteration, spurious quality, or any threat to public health. Section 318(4), which deals -8- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR with illegal or unauthorised sale or transport of regulated items, cannot be pressed into service when the petitioners are able to prima facie demonstrate that the goods were lawfully manufactured under a valid licence and were accompanied by GST invoices and transport documents. Similarly, Section 190, relating to fraudulent or dishonest removal or transport of goods to evade duty or lawful charge, stands excluded where the documents on record show full tax compliance. Section 275, which essentially concerns possession or transportation of goods without authority, is also rendered inapplicable as the petitioners' firm holds all requisite statutory approvals, including trademark registration, Udyam registration, and GST certification. Thus, even if the complaint is taken at its face value, none of the essential ingredients of the offences alleged are disclosed, and the registration of the FIR is, therefore, unsustainable in law. -9-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR
8. Therefore, in the light of Sections 123, 318(4), 190 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, even if the allegations in the complaint are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, none of the essential ingredients constituting the offences alleged in the FIR are made out as against the petitioners. Continuation of the investigation and prosecution in such circumstances would not only prejudice the reputation and business of the petitioners' firm but would also amount to an abuse of the machinery of criminal law. This Court is, therefore, satisfied that the present case warrants exercise of the inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings.
9. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The proceedings in Crime No.87/2025 registered by the respondent-Police, pending on the file of the Senior
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6906 CRL.P No. 201749 of 2025 HC-KAR Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhalki, Bidar, for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COPTA) and Sections 123, 318(4), 190 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, insofar as the petitioners are concerned, are hereby quashed.
(iii) The Investigating Officer is directed to forthwith release the seized products to the petitioners, subject to due identification.
(iv) All pending IAs stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23 CT:SI