Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 14, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Narendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 July, 2023

Author: Hemant Chandangoudar

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                                                    -1-
                                                          NC: 2023:KHC-K:5725
                                                          CRL.P No. 201063 of 2023




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH

                                 DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                                 BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
                             CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201063 OF 2023 (482-)
                       BETWEEN:

                       1.    NARENDRA, S/O PINNYA RATHOD,
                             AGE 54 YEARS, OCCUAPTION, BUSINESS, RESIDENT
                             OF LAXMI TIMMAPPA RICE MILL, CHANDARKI ROAD,
                             GURUMITKAL TALUK GURUMITKAL, DISTRICT
                             YADGIRI 585214

                                                                      ...PETITIONER
                       (BY SRI. B C JAKA,ADVOCATE)
                       AND:

                       1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                             THROUGH YADGIRI TOWN POLICE STATION
                             DISTRICT YADGIRI 585201, NOW REPRESENTED BY
                             ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                             KALABURAGI BENCH 585107

Digitally signed by                                                  ...RESPONDENT
KHAJAAMEEN L
MALAGHAN
Location: HIGH COURT
                       (BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M PATIL, HCGP)
OF KARNATAKA
                             THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
                       THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE
                       PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND BE PLEASED TO QUASH
                       THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO. 564/2021, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
                       SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT YADGIRI, WHICH WAS
                       REGISTERED ARISING OUT OF IN CRIME NO. 93/2019 AND FILED
                       CHARGE SHEET U/SEC. 3 AND 7 OF THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES
                       ACT 1955, AND SEC. 2,3,4, 12, 16, 18, 19,20 OF KARNATAKA
                       ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES CONTROL ORDER 2016 AND ALSO SEC. 3,
                       4,5,6, 8, 9,10,11 OF THE KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES
                       (MAINTENANCE OF ACCOUNTS, DISPLAY OF PRICES AND STOCKS)
                       ORDER 1981, AND THE PREVENTION OF BLACK MARKETING AND
                       MAINTENANCE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1981, AND SEC. 465
                       OF IPC, TO SECURE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND TO PREVENT ABUSE
                                 -2-
                                       NC: 2023:KHC-K:5725
                                      CRL.P No. 201063 of 2023




OF PROCESS OF THE COURT ANDPASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR
ORDERS, WHICH THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO
PASS, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                              ORDER

The petitioner - accused No.2, who is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 2, 3, 4, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Order, 2016 and also Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Maintenance of Accounts, Display of Prices and Stocks) Order, 1981, and the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance Essential Commodities act, 1981 and Section 46 of IPC, has filed this petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No.2 submits that, the accused No.2 herein has been implicated solely on the basis of confession statement of the accused No.3, who is alleged to have stated that, the rice meant for distribution under Public Distribution System was supplied by the petitioner - accused No.2 herein. Hence, he submits that, in the absence of any material to show that, the food grains seized were meant for distribution under Public Distribution System, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners - accused herein, will be an abuse of process of law.

3. The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State submits that, the petitioners - accused were -3- NC: 2023:KHC-K:5725 CRL.P No. 201063 of 2023 involved in transportation of the food grains meant for distribution under Public Distribution System unauthorizedly. Hence, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate, does not warrant any interference.

4. Considered the submissions, made by the learned counsel for the parties.

5. In the instant case, the charge-sheet material does not contain any corroborative material that, the petitioner - accused No.2 herein was involved in transportation of food grains meant for distribution under Public Distribution System unauthorizedly. In the absence of any corroborative material, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, is impermissible.

6. The impugned proceeding as against the accused No.1 was quashed by this Court in 200791/2023 and connected matters (DD 5.7.2023) by following the observations made in 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 -4- NC: 2023:KHC-K:5725 CRL.P No. 201063 of 2023 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."

7. The prosecution has not placed any material that, the food grains seized from the possession of the co-accused was meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System. In the absence of any corroborative material that, the petitioner - accused No.2 was involved in transportation of the food grains unauthorizedly, except the statement of the co- accused, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner - accused No.2 will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER
i) Criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned proceeding in CC No.564/2021 arising out of Crime No.93/2019 pending on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Yadgiri, insofar as it relates to the petitioner - accused No.2 is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64