- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100164 OF 2019 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: DURGANNA S/O. SOMANING KANNOLLI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC. KSRTC, DRIVER, R/O. SONAKANAHALLI, TQ. INIDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.G. INDI AND SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HUNAGUND POLICE STATION, NOW REP. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C. 1973, SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION & SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT & ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 21.03.2019 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.21/2012 BY II-ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOTE AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 21.02.2012 PASSED IN C.C.NO.140/2007 BY PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC COURT, HUNAGUND AND THEREBY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FROM THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION RULE 4 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES LICENSING ORDER, 1986 AND RULE 3 OF KEROSENE (RESTRICTION ON USE AND FIXATION OF CEILING PRICE) ORDER, 1993 R/W SECTION 7(1)(a)(ii)) OF THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.B.G.Indi and Sri.K.L.Patil, learned counsel for revision petitioners and Sri.Praveena Y Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 2. Revision petitioner is the accused No.1, who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.140/2007 being the driver of a lorry which was carrying 10,000 liters of blue kerosene worth Rs.95,000/- which was seized on 11.05.2006 at about 3.45 a.m., on NH-13 near Belagal Cross is the revision petitioner. 3. After due trial, he has been convicted and sentenced as under: “Acting U/Sec.255(2) of Cr.P.C. accused No.1 is convicted for the offences punishable Under Rule 4 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Licensing order 1986 and Rule 3 of Kerosene (Restriction on use and fixation of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 ceiling price) order 1993 R/W Sec. 7(1)(a)(ii) of E.C.Act. Accused No.1 shall undergo S.I. for Six Months and pay a fine of Rs.5000/-. In default he shall undergo S.I. for 3 months. Accused No.2 is acquitted for the offence punishable Under Rule 4 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Licensing order 1986 and Rule 3 of Kerosene (Restriction on use and fixation of ceiling price) order 1993 R/W Sec.7(1)(a)(ii) of E.C. Act. The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused No.1 and 2 are stand cancelled. Deputy Commissioner Bagalkot has already confiscated the properties to the State as per order dated 20-05-2006 and same is made absolute. MO-1 to 4 are worthless properties, hence ordered to be destroyed after appeal period is over.” - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 4. Accused No.2 has been acquitted and State did not file any appeal against acquittal of accused No.2. 5. Order of conviction and sentence was confirmed in Crl.A.No.21/2012 after re-appreciation of the material on record. 6. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused No.1 is before this Court in this revision petition. 7. Sri.B.G.Indi, learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition vehemently contend that accused was only a driver of the lorry and he did not know the contents of the goods in the Tanker. Therefore, he cannot be held liable for the conscious possession and transportation of the blue kerosene which has been ignored by both the Courts and wrongly recorded an order of conviction resulting in - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 miscarriage of justice and thus sought for allowing the revision petition. 8. Alternatively, Sri.B.G.Indi would contend that in the event this Court up holding the order of conviction taking note of the fact that the presently the accused is a middle aged family person, wife and three children to be looked after, is eking out his livelihood by driving school bus. Therefore, the sentence of imprisonment needs to be set aside by enhancing the fine amount reasonably. 9. Per contra, Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent- State supports the impugned judgment. 10. He would further contend that there is a minimum punishment of six months for the aforesaid offences prescribes in the statute and therefore, the alternate submission cannot be accepted and sought for dismissal of the revision petition in toto. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 12. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that PSI of Hungund on credible information intercepted the movement of Tanker bearing No.KA-28/555 which was carrying 10,000 liters blue kerosene without pass or permit. The lorry and illegal kerosene was seized and sample was drawn. Thereafter, charge sheet came to be filed. 13. After due trial, accused was convicted for the aforesaid offences as he was the driver of the Tanker and he did not possess necessary documents for transporting the blue kerosene. 14. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court re-appreciated the material evidence available on record and by considered judgment dated 21.03.2019, dismissed the appeal filed by the accused, which needs no interference in this revision petition. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 15. This would take this Court to the alternate submission made on behalf of the accused/revision petitioner. 16. In order to appreciate the said aspect it is just and necessary to cull out Section 7 of E.C. Act reads as under: “7. Penalties.―[(1) If any person contravenes any order made under Section 3,― (a) he shall be punishable,― (i) in the case of an order made with reference to clause (h) or clause (i) of sub-section (2) of that section, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and shall also be liable to fine, and (ii) in the case of any other order, with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that the court may, for any adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three months; - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 (b) any property in respect of which the order has been contravened shall be forfeited to the Government; (c) any package, covering or receptacle in which the property is found and any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying the property shall, if the court so orders, be forfeited to the Government. (2) If any person to whom a direction is given under clause (b) of sub-section (4) of section 3 fails to comply with the direction, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that the court may, for any adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three months. (2A) If any person convicted of an offence under sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) or under sub-section (2) is again convicted of an offence under the same provision, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for the second and for every subsequent offence for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine: - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 Provided that the court may, for any adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.” 17. On careful reading of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, especially the proviso after Section 2A, this Court in a given case by recording the adequate reasons may order for lesser punishment than the prescribed minimum punishment of six months for the proved offences. 18. Taking note of the fact that accused is a first time offender and has got a family to maintain and he is eking out his livelihood by driving a school bus and entire seized kerosene has been put into common pool for public distribution; except the sample and incident is an isolated incident; there is no complaint against the petitioner subsequent to the incident that occurred which is subject matter of this case, enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/- to be payable on or before 15.05.2025 by directing the period of - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 imprisonment already undergone by the accused by modifying the sentence of six months, would meet the ends of justice in the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. Accordingly, the following order is passed. ORDER (i) Criminal Revision Petition is allowed in part. (ii) While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offences punishable under Rule 4 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Licensing Order 1986 and Rule 3 of Kerosene (Restriction on use and Fixation of Ceiling Price) Order 1993 read with Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, the sentence of simple imprisonment of six months is modified by directing the custody period already undergone by the accused as period of imprisonment and directing to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.50,000/- on or before 15.05.2025. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6228 CRL.RP No. 100164 of 2019 (iii) Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount as referred to supra would automatically result in restoration of the jail sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court. (iv) Office to return the Trial Court records along with a copy of this order for issuance of modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC CT:PA LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 37