Allowed

Sri Harshavardhana K v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Sept 2023CRL.P/1287/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC sought to quash proceedings alleging violation of the Essential Commodities Act. The Court held that the seizure was unlawful as the complainant lacked authority to seize goods, and no material proved the goods were meant for BPL distribution, rendering the proceedings an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.7119/2022 are quashed.

Sri Harshavardhana K Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:33380 CRL.P No. 1287 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1287 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI HARSHAVARDHANA K S/O KRISHNA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS DRIVER OF LORRY NO KA52B1847 LAKSHMIDEVI NAGAR, KUDUR TOWN KUDUR HOBLI, MAGADI 577 548 RAMANAGAR, KARNATAKA.

¶7

SRI. SHRENIVASA S/O RAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS DRIVER OF KA52B2779 BHAGINAGERE THIPPASANDRA HOB MADGADI TALUK-562131 RAMANAGARA, KARNATAKA.

¶8

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶9

SRI SATISH K S S/O LATE SHRERAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS TUMKURU ROAD, KUDUR TOWN KUDRU HOBLI, MAGADI TQ RAMANAGARA, KARNATAKA.

¶10

SRI. NAVEEN S S/O SREENIVAS AGED ABOUT 35 YARS MANAGER, NO 175/2, 1ST FLOOR KPTCL STREET, HMS LAYOUT AREHALLI, UTTRAHALLI SUBRAMANYAPURA BANGALORE CITY 560 078.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. S P KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VASANTHAKUMAR K M, ADVOCATE)

¶13

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:33380 CRL.P No. 1287 of 2023

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS KUDUR POLICE STATION MAGADI SUB DIVN, RAMAGNARA DISTRICT NOW REPRESENTED BY STATE PP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU 560001

¶16

SRI S ANIL KUMAR S/O LATE SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS POWER T V, NO.487, KYALASANAHALLI DODDAGUBBI MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560 007, RAMANAGARA KARNATAKA.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.7119/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI RAMANAGARA ALLEGING VIOLIATION OF SEC.3 AND 7 OF THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955 BEING ARBITRARY ERRONEOUS APART FROM BEING ABUSE OF PROCESS OF COURT AND OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY AND JUSTICE, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioners-accused are charge sheeted alleging that they by conniving with accused No.4 unauthorizedly stacked the essential commodities meant for distribution to the BPL card holders from the godown of the Government and transported the same in two lorries to sell them in the black market.

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:33380 CRL.P No. 1287 of 2023

¶24

Mr. S.P. Kulkarni, learned senior counsel for the petitioners counsel submits that, in the absence of any material that the essential commodities alleged to have been seized from the Trucks belonging to the accused were meant for distribution to the BPL Card holders and also the said essential commodities belongs to the Government, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶25

He further submits that the essential commodities alleged to have been seized by the complainant is not by the Police Officer in-charge of the Police Station / or any authored public servant who is alone empowered to conduct search and seizure of the essential commodities under the provisions of the Karnataka Essential Commodities Act.

¶26

On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State submits that, the charge sheet material discloses that the petitioners unauthorizedly stacked the essential commodities meant for distribution to the BPL Card holder and transported to sell the same in an open market have committing the aforesaid offences, and the learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance.

¶27

Considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:33380 CRL.P No. 1287 of 2023

¶30

The complainant lodged the FIR on 21.7.2022 stating that on receiving several complaints that the food grains meant for distribution to the BPL Card holders were transported illegally, his media house followed the subject lorries, and on interception of the lorries, and on questioning the lorry drivers and also the owner of the Boloro Car which was following the Truck, they have stated that the Ragi which was stacked in the Gowdown belonging to the Government with the help of Naveen were transported unauthorizedly to sell them in an open market.

¶31

Admittedly, the Police Officer in-charge of the Police Station or any authorised Public Servant is the competent authority to seize the Ragi meant for distribution to the BPL Card holder, and the complainant who is not the competent authority is alleged to have seized the lorry as well as the ragi which were allegedly transported unauthorizedly. Hence, the seizure of the lorry as well as the ragi allegedly meant for distribution to the BPL card holder is one without authority of law.

¶32

The charge sheet does not contain any material that the ragi which was seized from the petitioners herein were meant for distribution to the BPL Card holders. The petitioners have also produced the invoices for having purchased the ragi which was seized from the lorries belonging to the accused from the SLV Commercials, APMC Yard Bangarpete, Kolar District.

¶33

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:33380 CRL.P No. 1287 of 2023

¶34

Hence, the search and seizure of the ragi which was allegedly meant for distribution to the BPL card holders by an incompetent person culminating in taking cognizance of the aforesaid offences stand vitiated. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶35

10. Accordingly I pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

i) The criminal petition is allowed.

¶38

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.7119/2022 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge, JMFC, Magadi, Ramanagara stands quashed.

¶39

It is needless to state that liberty is reserved with the petitioners to file an application for release of the ragi seized and if such an application is filed, the learned Magistrate to consider the same and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

Sri Harshavardhana K v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Harshavardhana K v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhakrishna Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri. Dhanraj Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Lohith v Vs the State of Karnataka

C. M. Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Anilkumar M Dalavai @ Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Ramesha Vs the State of Karnataka