Dismissed¶5

State of Karnataka v. Sri Govindaraju

Karnataka HC12 Jan 2026CRL.RP/1521/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; CRL.RP No. 1521 of 2024; decided 12.01.2026 by S Vishwajith Shetty, J.; confiscation of vehicle under S.43A Karnataka Excise Act, 1965; offences Ss.32, 34, 38-A, 43; effect of acquittal of accused (CC No.89/2015, acquittal attained finality) on confiscation of owner's vehicle; appellate court's finding on owner's lack of knowledge/entrustment noted; State's revision dismissed; impugned order in Crl.A.No.55/2021 (30.05.2023) of III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura; vehicle KA04-9396; FIR dated 03.03.2018; Chikkaballapura.

What did the court decide?

None to the petitioner-State; the appellate judgment and order dated 30.05.2023 in Crl.A.No.55/2021 setting aside the confiscation of the vehicle stands. Pending interlocutory application(s) disposed as not surviving. ¶5

State of Karnataka Vs Sri Govindaraju — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment and order dated 30.05.2023 in Crl.A.No.55/2021, by which the Appellate Court set aside the confiscation of the respondent's vehicle, was liable to be set aside in the State's revision. +1 more

¶1

Court's answer

Since the accused, who was charge sheeted in the case, has been acquitted in the criminal case registered against him and that acquittal has attained finality, the Appellate Court was fully justified in setting aside the order of confiscation of the vehicle passed by the competent authority.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

No illegality or irregularity was found in the appellate court's order; the revision petition does not merit consideration.

¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision Petition under S.397 r/w S.401 Cr.P.C. by the State against the order of the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura in Crl.A.No.55/2021 (30.05.2023), which set aside the Deputy Commissioner of Excise's order dated 27.07.2021 confiscating the respondent-owner's vehicle (KA04-9396). The vehicle, driven by one Ganesh, was found on 03.03.2018 transporting 10 beer bottles without licence/permit during election time (offences under Ss.32, 34, 38-A, 43, Karnataka Excise Act, 1965), and confiscation proceedings were initiated under S.43A of the Act. HELD: the accused, tried in CC No.89/2015 before the jurisdictional Magistrate, stood acquitted and the acquittal had attained finality; the Appellate Court was therefore fully justified in setting aside the order of confiscation; no illegality or irregularity was found in the appellate order. Revision petition dismissed; pending interlocutory application disposed as not surviving. (S Vishwajith Shetty, J.; oral order dated 12.01.2026; paras 3-5)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:1697 CRL.RP No. 1521 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1521 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EXCISE INSPECTOR CHIKKABALLAPURA RANGE CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI GOVINDARAJU S/O VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/AT NO.3246, 3RD CROSS BHAGATHSINGHNAGARA VAPASANDRA CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN - 562 101.

¶13

…RESPONDENT THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401(FILED U/S.438 R/W SEC.442 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2023 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.55/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION.

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:1697 CRL.RP No. 1521 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

Petitioner/State is before this Court in this Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to set-aside the judgment and order dated 30.05.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.55/2021 by the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura.

¶21

Heard the learned HCGP for the petitioner/State.

¶22

Facts leading to filing of this revision petition narrated briefly are, according to the prosecution on 03.03.2018 at about 09.30 p. m. driver of the vehicle bearing registration number KA04-9396, namely, Ganesh, was found transporting 10 beer bottles without license and permit during election time. Therefore, FIR was registered against him for offences punishable under Sections 32, 34, 38-A, 43 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). The vehicle which was used for transporting the liquor belonged to the respondent herein. The same was seized under a mahazar and produced before the competent officer/Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Chikkaballapur. Proceedings were initiated under Section 43A of the Act, for confiscating the

¶23

¶24

NC: 2026:KHC:1697 CRL.RP No. 1521 of 2024

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

vehicle used to commit the crime and the Deputy Commissioner on 27.07.2021 had passed an order of confiscation of the seized vehicle. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein, who is the registered owner of the vehicle in question had filed Crl.A.No.55/2021 before the Court of III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, which was allowed by judgment and order dated 30.05.2023. Aggrieved by the same, the State is before this Court.

¶27

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that accused/Ganesh, who was charge sheeted in the present case for the aforesaid offences, was tried before the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate at Chikkaballapura in CC No.89/2015 and was acquitted of the charge sheeted offences. Undisputedly, judgment and order of acquittal passed against the accused, who allegedly had committed the crime has attained finality. The vehicle in question is said to have been used by accused/Ganesh for committing the crime. The Appellate Court, having appreciated that the accused has been acquitted in the criminal case which was registered against him, has rightly held that the competent authority/Deputy Commissioner was not justified in ordering confiscation of the vehicle in question

¶28

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:1697 CRL.RP No. 1521 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

which was allegedly used to commit the crime in CC No.89/2015. In addition to the same, the Appellate Court has also observed that the prosecution had failed to prove that the respondent, who is the registered owner of the vehicle in question had knowledge of accused committing the offence and in spite of the same, had entrusted the vehicle to the accused. Since accused, who was charge sheeted in the present case has been acquitted in the criminal case registered against him, I am of the opinion that the Appellate Court was fully justified in setting aside the order of confiscation of the vehicle in question passed by the competent authority. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the said order. Therefore, this revision petition does not merit consideration. Accordingly, the same is

¶32

dismissed .

¶33

In view of the dismissal of the main petition, pending interlocutory application, if any, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same is disposed off.

¶34

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶35

State of Karnataka v. Sri Govindaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Karnataka v. Sri Govindaraju

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

Pavan Vs State by

Shri Satya Narayan Tulysan Vs M/S Krishna Enterprises

M/S Sarvana Alloy Steels P Ltd. Vs M/S Xindia Steels Limited

State by Sarguru Police Station Vs Devendra Kumar Soni

T B Venkataswamy Vs H M Chandrashekharaiah

Mohammed Asghar Vs Riyaz @ Riyaz Ahmed