- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200703 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. IMAM SAB S/O SHAMEED SAB, AGE:36 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL, TIPUSULTAN COLONY, WARD NO. 12 SINDHANUR, DIST. RAICHUR-585401. 2. MUNEER PASHA S/O NABI SAB, AGE:42 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. NEAR ELAYI MASJID INDIRA NAGAR, WARD NO. 13, SINDHANUR, DIST. RAICHUR-585401. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI AJAY JAWALI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SINDHANUR POLICE STATION, SINDHANUR, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI-585107. 2. HANUMESH Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 AGE:30 YEARS, OCC: FOOD INSPECTOR, SINDHANUR, TQ. SINDHANUR, DIST. RAICHUR-585401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.(OLD) U/SEC 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED REGISTERED IN SINDHANUR POLICE STATION CRIME NO.51/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SINDHANUR, DIST. RAICHUR FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHALBE U/SEC 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to quash the FIR and complaint registered in Crime No.51/2025 by Sindhanur Town Police Station, Raichur District, pending on the file of Principal - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur, District Raichur, for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 3. Factual matrix of the case: It is the case of the prosecution that the Food Inspector-Hanumesh attached to Tahsil Office, Sindhanur, lodged a complaint stating that on 04.04.2025 around about 4.00 a.m., he had received an information that rice was being transported illegally in Bolero vehicle near Dyavamma temple of Sindhanur. At 4.15 a.m., he went to the spot and saw one white Bolereo vehicle standing near the said temple loaded with rice packets. He enquired with the driver of the vehicle about the documents relating to the transportation of rice. However, he did not get satisfactory answer from the said driver. Therefore, he seized the said vehicle along with 67 rice packets worth of which is Rs.70,350/- and thereafter, filed complaint before the respondent-Police. After registering the case in Crime - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 No.51/2025, the respondent-Police are conducting investigation. The investigation is under progress. 4. Heard Sri.Ajay Jawali, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Gopalkrishna B.Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioners are businessman and driver respectively. They have produced two documents annexed to the petition and they are marked as document Nos.3 and 4 which shows that petitioner No.1 is the proprietor of M.D.Traders and he had permit to transport the notified agricultural produce namely, rice and also produced the bill. Inspite of having produced these documents, the same have not been considered by the complainant and he has filed false case etc. 6. It is further submitted that since the documents would indicate that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were validly transporting the said rice, ingredients of Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act would not be applicable. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 Therefore, the FIR registered against the petitioners has to be quashed. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that even though the documents have been produced before this Court, the scope of inherent jurisdiction is narrow to verify the authenticity of those documents. Therefore, the petitioners may be directed to produce those documents before the respondent-Police. The respondent-Police would verify the authenticity of the documents thereof and they would file necessary report. Making such submissions, he prays to reject the petition. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, though it appears from the record that the petitioners were transporting the rice without showing any valid documents to the complainant, the fact remains that, the petitioners have annexed two documents as document - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2519 CRL.P No. 200703 of 2025 Nos.3 and 4 to the petition to substantiate that they have been authorized to transport the rice. However, those documents cannot be considered by this Court without verifying its authenticity. Therefore, it is appropriate to direct the petitioners herein to produce those documents before the respondent-Police with a direction to verify its authenticity. If the respondent-Police are satisfied after considering those documents, the appropriate report shall be filed within two months from the date of production of those documents before the respondent-Police. 9. In the light of the observations made above, the petition stands disposed of. Ordered accordingly. In view of disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19/CT:PK