- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11137 CRL.P No. 5942 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5942 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MANJANAIK S/O. NAGANAIK, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. GOGGA VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK- 577 427, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. 2. SRI. GURARAJ S/O. SHEKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, R/O. 1ST CROSS, KAMALNAGAR, RANEBENNURU TOWN-581 115. DIST: HAVERI …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VASANTHAKUMAR K.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. DAVANAGERE RURAL POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE RURAL CIRCLE, NOW REPRESENTED BY STATE P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560 001. 2. SRI. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RURAL CIRCLE, DAVANAGERE, Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11137 CRL.P No. 5942 of 2024 DAVANAGERE-577 001, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R-1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1317/2021 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND C.J.M. COURT, DAVANAGERE FILED U/S 3 AND 7 OF THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 AND U/S 18 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (PDS) PUBLIC CONTROL ORDER 1992 BEING TOTALLY ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND AMOUNTING TO ABUSE OF PROCESS OF COURT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER Petitioners-accused No.1 and 2 who have been charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and under Section 18 of the PDS Control Order, 1992 are before this Court seeking relief. 2. The prosecution alleges that, on 29.6.2020, on receiving credible information that the rice meant for distribution under the Public Distribution Scheme (PDS) was being transported unauthorizedly. The vehicle was intercepted, and upon search and seizer it was discovered that the petitioner-accused No.1 was transporting the rice/food grains meant for distribution under the PDS unauthorizedly without permit and valid licence. The accused - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11137 CRL.P No. 5942 of 2024 No.1 the driver of the lorry was apprehended and in his voluntary statement he has allegedly stated that the rice seized belongs to accused No.2. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the prosecution has not placed any substantive evidence to establish that the rice/food grains seized from the petitioner- accused No.1 was meant for distribution under the Public Distribution Scheme. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 5. The prosecution after seizing the rice/food grains from the accused has not sent the sample of the rice to the Forensic Science Laboratory for testing to establish that the rice seized were meant for distribution under the PDS. The prosecution has also not placed any material to substantiate that the petitioners procured the rice from the dealer who are authorized to distribute the rice meant for public distribution under the PDS. 5. 20. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.36438-439/2014 and W.P.No.36542/2014 (GM-EC) disposed of on 03.12.2014, at Para No.14, has held as under:- "14. In the instant case, petitioners are not authorized dealers. They are not shown to be engaged in purchase, storage or sale of food grains which were issued to the authorized dealer for distribution under the public distribution system. Therefore, essential ingredient explicitly stated under Clause 18 (a) i.e., the goods / commodities must have - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11137 CRL.P No. 5942 of 2024 been issued to the authorized dealer under the public distribution system is missing. No finding is recorded by the 1st respondent in this regard. In fact, there is no material whatsoever to indicate this aspect. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, unless there is material to show that the commodities were issued to an authorized dealer for distribution under the public distribution system or that a person other than the authorized dealer had sought to purchase or sell or store or offer for sale food grains meant for distribution under public distribution system through the price depots, prohibition contained under Clause 18 (a) of the Control Order would not be attracted. In the absence of such findings such action will not attract penal measure including seizure or forfeiture." 21. Perusal of the charge sheet material indicates that, the allegation against the accused herein is that, they were transporting the food grains meant for distribution under PDS unauthroizedly. The charge sheet material does not disclose as to where the accused procured the food grains meant for distribution under PDS, and also no material is placed that, the seized food grains were meant for distribution under PDS. In the absence of any material that, the seized food grains were meant for distribution under PDS, the registration of FIR culminating in laying the charge sheet stands vitiated. 22. The Food Inspector is only authorized to conduct search and seizure of the food grains meant for distribution under PDS as specified under Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016. If a person is transporting rice which is notified as an essential commodity without permit, it is for the police concerned to seize the same by following due process of law.” 6. In the instant case, there is no substantive evidence to establish that the rice/food grains transported by the petitioner- accused No.1 were meant for distribution under the Public Distribution Scheme, and so also there is no material to establish that the petitioner-accused No.2 is the authorized dealer for distribution of the rice meant for distribution under the PDS, and if the petitioners were transporting the rice/food grains unauthorizedly - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11137 CRL.P No. 5942 of 2024 without valid licence or permit, it was for the concerned Police Inspector to conduct search and seizer under the Karnataka Essential Commodities Act, 1955, by following due process of the law. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. 8. The impugned proceeding in CC No.1317/2021 arising out of Crime No.150/2020 registered by the Rural Police Station, Davanagere, pending on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, at Davanagere, insofar as it relates to the petitioners - herein is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5