Mohammad Ajeej Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.(OLD) U/SEC 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C NO.472/2022 (CRIME NO.86/2022 OF JEWARGI P.S.) AND FILING THE CHARGE

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1427 CRL.P No. 200371 of 2025

¶19

SHEET AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955, AND SECTION 34 OF IPC, SAME IS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, JEWARGI KALABURAGI DISTRICT.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)

¶24

The brief facts of the case are as under:

¶25

It is the case of the prosecution that on 09.04.2022

¶26

at about 12-30 p.m. the complainant stated to have received the credible information that rice bags were being transported illegally in a lorry from Akandeshwar APMC Yard, Jewargi. Immediately, the complainant stated to have secured the panchas and also other persons, visited the spot at about 01-30 p.m. and intercepted the said lorry. However, he could not secure the presence of the driver of the said lorry. In the absence of the driver, they

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1427 CRL.P No. 200371 of 2025

¶28

conducted search and seized the bags containing rice worth of Rs.4,84,610/- and also the lorry worth of Rs.8,00,000/-. The case came to be registered by the complainant before the jurisdictional police. The jurisdictional police have registered the FIR in Crime No.86/2022. After conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet.

¶29

Heard Sri Punith Markal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.B. Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

¶30

It is the submission of the learned counsel for

¶31

the petitioner that the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.2 in this case. The entire case is based on the strength of the confessional statement of the accused No.1. It is further submitted that on reading of the entire charge sheet, nowhere it is stated that the alleged load of rice bags were to be distributed to the public. In the absence of documents to show that the rice was to be distributed to the public under the Public Distribution

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1427 CRL.P No. 200371 of 2025

¶33

System, registering the case under the Essential Commodities Act cannot be sustained. Therefore, the charge sheet has to be quashed in order to secure the ends of justice. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition.

¶34

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently justified the charge sheet submitted by the respondent and he further submitted that the department has rightly conducted the raid and seized the rice bags, which were meant to be distributed to the public. The petitioner being the owner of the lorry has not explained as to how such rice bags were filled into the lorry. Therefore, the filing of the charge sheet is justified and there is no ground to quash the FIR. Making such submissions, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶35

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the records that both accused Nos.1 an 2 were doing the business of collecting the rice from the beneficiaries, who availed the benefit of

¶36

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1427 CRL.P No. 200371 of 2025

¶37

receiving the free rice from the department and collected it in the APMC yard and thereafter it was sold to the other States. Though it is stated that they have seized the rice bags, which were allegedly stored in the lorry, nothing is there to show that it was the rice which was issued under the Public Distribution System. In the absence of documents to show that the rice was purchased under the Public Distribution System, registering the case under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act cannot be sustained. Therefore, on reading the entire averments of the charge sheet, no case is made out against the petitioner. Even if the parties are directed to be appeared before the Court and face the trial, the possibility of recording the conviction would be bleak. Therefore, it is appropriate to quash the charge sheet in order to secure the ends of justice and to avoid the abuse of process of law.

¶38

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶39

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1427 CRL.P No. 200371 of 2025

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶42

(ii) The entire proceedings in C.C.No.472/2022 arising out of Crime No.86/2022 of Jewargi Police Station and the charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 34 of IPC, pending before the learned Senior Civil and JMFC, Jewargi, Kalaburagi District are quashed.

¶43

In view of disposal of the main petition,

¶44

I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration.

¶45

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶46

RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39 CT:PK

Mohammad Ajeej v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Ajeej 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

Ashraf Vs the State of Karnataka

A R Srinivasa Vs State by Pete Police Station

M Manjunath Vs R Kumar

Sunil Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Indrajit Das Gupt and Ors. Vs the State and Anr.