Allowed¶30

Bashirahamad S/O. Allabaksha Aralikatti, v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Feb 2025CRL.P/100241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of cognizance; Essential Commodities Act Sections 3 and 7; Karnataka Essential Commodities (PDS) Public Control Order 2016 Clauses 3 and 18; PDS rice seizure; no FSL examination of seized rice; no evidence of procurement from fair price shops; abuse of process of law; S.482 Cr.P.C. / S.528 BNSS; BNS 2023 S.111(4); CRL.P No. 100241 of 2025; High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench; Justice Hemant Chandangoudar.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 3992/2024 (Kasabapeth P.S. Crime No. 66/2024) pending before the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-III, Hubballi, insofar as they relate to petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4. ¶30

Bashirahamad S/O. Allabaksha Aralikatti, Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:3274 CRL.P No. 100241 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100241 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

BASHIRAHAMAD S/O. ALLABAKSHA ARALIKATTI, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESSMEN, R/AT. NEAR KASHIDULE MAKAN, SADARSOFA, KOLEKAR PLOT, OLD HUBBALLI-580020.

¶7

SMT. RIZWANA W/O. MOHAMMED GOUSE BIJAPUR, AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/AT. MASTANSOFA, AKKASALIGA ONI, OLD HUBBALLI-580020.

¶8

SADANAND S/O. SHANKRAPPA KURLI AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE JOB, R/AT. NARAYANSOFA, BEHIND OLD KASABAPETH POLICE STATION, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580029.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR B K Location: HIGH MAHENDRAKUMAR COURT OFKARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.20 16:40:06 +0530

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KASABAPETH POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI,

¶14

REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO, QUASH THE COGNIZANCE DATED 20.11.2024 AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.2 TO 4/PETITIONERS IN KASABAPETH P.S. CRIME NO.66/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-III, AT HUBBALLI IN CC NO.3992/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 111(4) OF BNS, 2023 AND U/S 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 AND U/S 3

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC-D:3274 CRL.P No. 100241 of 2025

¶20

AND 18 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM) PUBLIC CONTROL ORDER 2016.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4 have been chargesheeted for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and under Clauses 3 and 18 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (PDS) Public Control Order, 2016.

¶25

The prosecution alleges that, based on credible information, a raid was conducted in a godown belonging to accused No. 1, where it was discovered that accused Nos. 1 to 4 had stored rice intended for distribution under the Public Distribution System (PDS) without authorization.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

¶27

Notably, the rice seized from the petitioners was not sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory to establish that it was intended for distribution under the PDS. In the absence of any substantial evidence proving that the seized rice constituted PDS stock, prosecuting the petitioners under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Furthermore, no material has been produced to substantiate that the petitioners procured the rice from fair price

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3274 CRL.P No. 100241 of 2025

¶29

shops authorized to distribute rice under the Public Distribution System.

¶30

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 3992/2024, pending before the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-III, Hubballi, are hereby quashed insofar as they relate to petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4.

¶31

Any pending applications are disposed of accordingly.

¶32

Ordered accordingly.

¶33

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶34

JTR Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13

Bashirahamad S/O. Allabaksha Aralikatti, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bashirahamad S/O. Allabaksha Aralikatti, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surakshit Enterprises Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Vijay S/O Basappa Hukkeri Vs the State of Karnataka

Samundarsingh S/O Nepalsingh Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr Shivalingappa Alias Shivakumar K. Maigur Vs the State of Karnataka

Imamsab S/O. Maktumsab Gudageri, Vs the State of Karnataka

Raju S/O Rudrappa Naik Vs the State of Karnataka