- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3831 CRL.P No. 103012 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103012 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SURESH S/O. TIRAKAPPA SURAD AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. AT POST. KUNIMELLIHALLI, TQ. SAVANUR, DIST. HAVERI-581110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HANGAL POLICE STATION, R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE FIR CRIME NO. 80/2021 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HANGAL DATED 30.04.2021 REGISTERED BY HANAGAL P.S. AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 5 AND 6 OF EXPLOSIVES SUBSTANCES ACT, 1908 AND 9B (1) (a) (b) OF EXPLOSIVES ACT 1884, CONCERNING THE PETITIONER, SO FOR AS PETITIONER /ACCUSED NO.4 IS CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3831 CRL.P No. 103012 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. The petitioner challenges the registration of an FIR for offences under Sections 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and Section 9B(1)(a) and (b) of the Explosives Act, 1884. The FIR was filed after a raid on a stone quarry, where Accused No. 1 (the owner of the quarry) and others were found attempting a blasting operation without the necessary licence. 3. The relevant sections of the Explosives Acts address licensing and prescribe punishments for contraventions. Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act penalizes making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances, while Section 9B(1)(a) and (b) of the Explosives Act cover violations related to the manufacture, possession, use, or transport of explosives without a valid licence. 4. The petitioner/accused had a valid licence issued by the Chief Controller of Explosives in Mangalore to carry out blasting operations in the quarry, which was valid until 25.05.2033. Therefore, the allegation that blasting operations were attempted without a licence is baseless. The only allegation against petitioner/accused No.4 is that he was the driver of the tempo belonging to Accused No. 1 and was present at the scene on the day of the inspection. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3831 CRL.P No. 103012 of 2022 5. The FIR against Accused No.1 was quashed by this Court in Criminal Petition No. 100960/2022, vide order dated 17.02.2025. 6. In view of the foregoing, the continuation of the investigation would be an abuse of the legal process. Consequently, the petition is allowed, and the impugned FIR in Crime No. 80/2021, registered by Hangal Police Station, insofar as it relates to petitioner/accused No.4, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78