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 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Satish vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 October, 2023

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                                                           -1-
                                                                  NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863
                                                                   CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                                       DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

                                                        BEFORE

                                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

                                        CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101757 OF 2023

                              BETWEEN:

                              1.   SATISH S/O KRISHNAJI PATIL,
                                   AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR,
                                   R/O. ISLAMPUR-415409,
                                   TQ. WALWA, DIST. SANGLI,
                                   MAHARASHTRA STATE.

                              2.   ABHILASH S/O SATISH PATIL,
                                   AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
                                   R/O. ISLAMPUR-415409,
                                   TQ. WALWA, DIST. SANGLI,
                                   MAHARASHTRA STATE.
                                                                              ... PETITIONERS
                              (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE)

                              AND:

                              1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                                   THROUGH THE EXCISE SUB INSPECTOR,
           Digitally signed

VISHAL
           by VISHAL
         NINGAPPA
         PATTIHAL
                                   CHIKKODI RANGE, CHIKKODI SUB-DIVISION,
NINGAPPA Date:
PATTIHAL 2023.10.16
           13:46:20
                                   BELAGAVI NORTH, R/BY THE STATE PUBLIC
           +0530

                                   PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                   DHARWAD BENCH.

                              2.   SHIVANAND S/O DHANAPAL TELI,
                                   GRAM PANCHAYAT, SIDNAL-591211,
                                   TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI.
                                                                             ... 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 F.I.R. AND COMPLAINT IN EXCISE CRIME
                              NO.86/2022-23/3504SIE2/350404 REGISTERED BY THE EXCISE SUB
                              INSPECTOR, CHIKKODI RANGE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 11, 12,
                              13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38(A) AND 43(A) OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT,
                              -2-
                                   NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863
                                    CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023




1965, (CASE IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, NIPANI) VIDE ANNEXURE- A AND B IN RESPECT OF
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO1 AND 2.

     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 proceedings in Crime No.86/2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38(A) AND 43(A) of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965.

2. Heard Sri. Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri.V.S.Kalasurmtah, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1.

3. Learned counsel Sri.Chetan Munnolli appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners were caught in possession of 3.9 liters of beer, carrying it from the State of Maharashtra into the State of Karnataka at the check post. This becomes a crime in Crime No.86/2022 for the aforesaid offences.

-3-

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863 CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023

4. The Learned counsel for the petitioner would urge a solitary contention that in terms of the Rule 21 notified under the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (Act for short), a person can stock 18.2 liters of beer. What is caught from the hands of the petitioners are only 3.9 liters of beer. Therefore, he would submit that the very registration of the crime is on an erroneous consideration of the law. He would seek to place reliance upon the judgment rendered by this Court in Crl.P.5650/2021, dated 16.9.2022. This Court has held as follows:

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.
                           Liquor                            Quantity

                1          Toddy, in such areas              2.5
                           of the State where                Litres
                           the sale of toddy to
                           public   is  allowed
                           under sub-rule (4) of
                                 -4-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863
                                       CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023




                        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,        2.3
                        Rum, Milk-Punch and         litres
                        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    9.1
                        (imported)                  litres

           7.           Denatured Spirit            750
                                                    mililitres

           8.           Xxxx

           9.           Wines     (including        9.0
                        mass    wine    and         litres
                        sacramental 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 -5- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863 CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023 petition are four in number. A four member family in a house, would be 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.
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. This Court interpreting Rule 21 of the Act, which is the subject matter of the lis as well, has rendered a finding that a permit or license would not be required, if it is within the permissible limits under the Rule 21 of the Act. Admittedly, in the case at hand, what is seized is 3.9 liters of beer and the entitlement is upto 18.2 liters, without a permit or license. Therefore, in the light of the -6- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11863 CRL.P No. 101757 of 2023 finding rendered by this Court (supra) and also the facts narrated hereinabove, the petition deserves to succeed.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER
i) Criminal Petition is allowed.
ii) The proceedings in Crime.No.86/2022 pending on the file of the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Nippani stands quashed qua the petitioners.

Sd/-

JUDGE vb ct:bck List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17