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 9, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Basavaraj S/O Huchhappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 December, 2022

Author: Hemant Chandangoudar

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                              -1-




                                         CRL.P No.104141 of 2022



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
           DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
                            BEFORE
       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
         CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104141 OF 2022 (482-)
BETWEEN:
1.   BASAVARAJ S/O HUCHHAPPA
     AGE.40 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER OF VEHICLE
     BOLERO PICKUP NO.KA-35/C7267
     R/O. 9TH WARD RAJAJINAGAR
     NEAR UJJINI SCHOOL
     TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI

2.   AJAYA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA
     AGE.35 YEARS, OCC. LABOURER
     R/O.9TH WARD RAJAJINAGAR
     NEAR UJJINI SCHOOL
     TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI
                                                 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. BHAGYASHREE N.B., ADVOCATE)


AND:
1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
     HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
     DHARWAD, THROUGH GADIGANUR
     POLICE STATION-580011

2.   C RAGHAVENDRA S/O CL NARASIMHALU
     AGE.36 YEARS, OCC.FOOD INSPECTOR
     SANDUR,
     R/O. FOOD INSPECTOR
     TALUK OFFICE SANDUR
     TQ.SANDUR DIST. BALLARI-583119
                                               ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP)
      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION
WITH CC NO. 250/2021 (CRIME NO. 27/2021) REGISTERED BY
GADIGANUR POLICE STAION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S
3, 7 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTILA COMMODITIES ACT 1955 AND U/S
                                  -2-




                                            CRL.P No.104141 of 2022



3, 4, 12, 18, 19 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (PUBLIC
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM) PUBLIC CONTROL ORDER 2016 AND U/S 4,
8, 3(2)(i), 6 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (STORAGE
ACCOUNTS MAINTAINING VALUE NOTIFICATION) ORDER ACT 1981
PENDING FOR BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT JUDGE
SANDUR BALLARI IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 AND
2 IS CONCERNED.

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

                                ORDER

The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent.

2. The petitioners have been charge sheeted for the offences punishable under u/s 3, 7 and 6(a) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 3, 4, 12, 18, 19 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Public Control Order, 2016 and under Sections 4, 8, 3(2)(i) and 6 of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Storage Accounts Maintaining Value Notification) Order 1981, alleging that the petitioners-accused were transporting the food grains meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System unauthorisedly.

3. A perusal of the charge sheet indicates that the Food Inspector concerned received the credible information on -3- CRL.P No.104141 of 2022 21.03.2021 at about 4.00 p.m. that the accused were transporting the food grains meant for distribution under public distribution system unauthorisedly, and thereafter, he went to the spot, intercepted the vehicle in which the food grains meant for distribution under public distribution system were being transport unauthorisedly and seized food material and thereafter the police registered the FIR at 7.00 p.m. on 21.03.2021.

4. The offences alleged against the petitioners-accused are cognizable. The police, in the absence of any exigency, could not have conducted the raid before registering the FIR. The registration of the FIR before conducting investigation is the normal procedure established by law and it is in conformity with Article 21 of the Constitution of India as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalitha Kumari vs. State of U.P.1

5. In the instant case, the credible information was received at 4.00 p.m., and the police ought to have registered the FIR before conducting the raid or ought to have explained 1 (2014)2 SCC 1 -4- CRL.P No.104141 of 2022 the exigencies for not registering the FIR before conducting the raid. Hence, the registration of the FIR before conducting raid is impermissible and the charge sheet filed against the petitioners-accused stand vitiated. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The impugned criminal proceedings in C.C. No.250/2021 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Sandur, insofar as it relates to the petitioners-accused herein, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KMS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23