Akash S/O Chandrahas Naik v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Aug 2025CRL.P/101234/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court quashes excise case proceedings for lack of search warrant and non-compliance with Section 54 of Karnataka Excise Act; vehicle search at check post required warrant per KL Subbayya precedent; abuse of process found.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings in Crime No.25/2025 registered by Ankola Police Station for offences under Sections 32, 34 and 38A of the Karnataka Excise Act against the petitioners are quashed. ¶¶65, ¶70-¶71

Akash S/O Chandrahas Naik Vs State of Karnataka — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102276 OF 2025 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101234 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶8

IN CRL.P. NO.102276 OF 2025:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

DIVAKAR S/O IRAYYA MADIVALA, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: KYATHANAHALLI, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA-27.

¶11

MADEVA S/O KRISHANAPPA PANDAVAPUR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC, R/O: 101-15 NAGAMANGALA ROAD, PANDAVAPURA TOWN, TOWN MANDYA-34.

¶12

… PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. RAM P. GHORPADE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

RAKESH S

HARIHAR

Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ANKOLA POLICE STATION, R/BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-11.

¶19

SUNIL S/O SATAPPA HULLOLLI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: POLICE OFFICER, R/BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT, DHARWAD, R/O: ANKOLA POLICE STATION, UTTARA KANNADA-581 314.

¶20

… RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN ANKOLA P.S. CR. NO.25/2025 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 32, 34, 38A OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE

¶23

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C. COURT ANKOLA, UTTARA KANNADA AGAINST THE PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2.

¶26

IN CRL. P. NO. 101234 OF 2025:

¶27

BETWEEN:

¶28

AKASH S/O CHANDRAHAS NAIK, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: PVT. WORK, R/O: H.NO.4713, LOLIEM POLEM, GOA-403 728.

¶29

SANTOSH S/O ANNAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: POLICE CONSTABLE, R/O: ANKOLA POLICE QUARTERS, ANKOLA, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 314.

¶30

… PETITIONERS

¶31

(BY SRI. RAM P. GHORPADE, ADVOCATE)

¶32

AND:

¶33

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ANKOLA POLICE STATION, R/BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-11.

¶34

SUNIL S/O SATAPPA HULLOLLI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: POLICE OFFICER, R/O: ANKOLA POLICE STATION, UTTARA KANNADA-581 314, REP. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD.

¶35

… RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶37

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE CASE PROCEEDINGS IN ANKOLA P.S. CR. NO.25/2025 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 32, 34, 38A OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN.) AND J.M.F.C. COURT, ANKOLA, UTTARA KANNADA AGAINST THE PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2/ACCUSED NO.3 AND 4.

¶38

THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶39

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

ORAL ORDER

¶42

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶43

These two petitions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are filed by accused Nos.1 to 4 with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.25/2025 registered by the Ankola Police Station, Uttara Kannada District for offences punishable under Sections 32, 34 and 38A of the Karnataka Excise Act.

¶44

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶45

FIR in Crime No.25/2025 was registered by the Ankola Police Station, Uttara Kannada District for the aforesaid offences against the accused Nos.1 to 4 based on the first information dated 06.02.2025 received from respondent No.2 – Police Officer, attached to Ankola Police Station, Uttara Kannada District, assailing the correctness of the criminal case registered against them, accused Nos.1 to 4 are before this Court in these two petitions.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that without registering the FIR, investigation has been commenced in the present case which is not permissible. He further submits that there is no compliance of Section 54 of the Karnataka

¶47

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Excise Act in the present cases. Accordingly, he prayed to allow the petitions.

¶50

Learned HCGP has opposed the petitions. She submits that the contraband articles were seized from a car, when it was intercepted at the check post and therefore, there is no requirement to comply Sections 53 and 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act in the present case.

¶51

The FIR in the present case was registered against

¶52

accused Nos.1 to 4 after the car bearing registration No.KA42/M-2190 in which they were travelling was intercepted near the check post within the jurisdiction of Ankola Police Station, Uttara Kannada District and from the said car, the Indian made foreign liquor beyond permissible limits which was being transported by the accused without having any valid licence, was recovered and seized. Undisputedly, the seizure from the vehicle in which accused were travelling was done on the early hours of 06.02.2025, which is at about 02:00 a.m. Section 53 of the Karnataka Excise Act provides for the power to the magistrate to issue a warrant for search and Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act provides for the power to search without

¶53

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

warrant. Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act reads as follows:

¶57

“54. Power to search without warrant. – Whenever the Excise Commissioner or a Deputy Commissioner or any police officer not below the rank of an officer in charge of a police station or any Excise Officer not below such rank as may be prescribed, has reason to believe that an offence under section 32, section 33, section 34, section 36 or section 37 has been, is being, or is likely to be, committed, and that a search warrant cannot be obtained without affording the offender an opportunity of escape or of concealing evidence of the offence, he may, after recording the grounds of his belief,-

¶58

(a) at any time by day or by night enter and search any place and seize anything found therein which he has reason to believe to be liable to confiscation under this Act; and

¶59

(b) detain and search and, if he thinks proper, arrest any person found in such place whom he has reason to believe to be guilty of such offence as aforesaid.”

¶60

Though in Section 53 of the Karnataka Excise Act, the word used is “place” for the purpose of search. The Hon'ble

¶61

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9712 CRL.P No. 102276 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101234 of 2025

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

Supreme Court in the case of KL Subbayya vs. State of Karnataka¹ has held that the word “place” under the Act included the vehicles which would include a car. In the case on hand, the vehicle from which the contraband articles were recovered and seized is undisputedly a car and therefore, in view of the aforesaid judgment, the Investigation Officer ought to have obtained a warrant for the purpose of searching the car. In the event, he was not in a position to obtain a warrant, then as provided under Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, he should have recorded the reasons for his belief that such warrant cannot be obtained without affording an opportunity to escape or of concealing the evidence of offence. In the case on hand, prima facie it appears that the requirement of Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act has not been complied. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the continuation of the further proceedings in the present cases would amount to abuse of process and law. Accordingly, the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

Criminal petitions are allowed. The entire proceedings in Crime No.25/2025 registered by the Ankola Police Station,

¶66