- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101717 OF 2025 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: SHOUKAT ILAHI AWATI, AGE 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AVATI GALLI, JAMAKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. …PETITIONER (BY SHRI HARSHWARDHAN M. PATIL, ADV. FOR SHRI RAMESH I. ZIRALI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, JAMAKHANDI TOWN POLICE STATION, DIST. BAGALKOT, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT: DHARWAD-580001. 2. NINGAPPA SHANKAR DESAI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: STATE GOVT. EMPLOYEE, FOOD INSPECTOR, TAHASILDAR OFFICE, JAMAKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301, REP. BY SPP, HCK, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS, ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION BY QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS, ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION BY QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C NO.247/2020 PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3, 7, 23 AND 24 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMAKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri Harshawardhan M. Patil, learned counsel for Sri Ramesh I Zirali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Abhishek Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.247/2020 on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Jamakhandi, Bagalakote District for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 7, 23 & 24 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (“EC Act” for short). 3. It is the case of the prosecution that respondent No.2 – complainant being the Food Inspector filed complaint against petitioner alleging that, on 15.03.2019 he received a credible information that, one Mehiboob Mansoorsab Bagwan is unauthorizedly distributing the rice at his shop, which was meant for public distribution under the Government Scheme - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 and as such the first informant along with sub-staff conducted raid and found that no one was present at the scene and shutter was closed and they went inside by opening the shutter and found plastic bags containing rice and he also found that 16 bags of rice were found in all 637 Kgs, after verification it has been confirmed that, same were meant for public distribution system under fair price distribution. Therefore, the shop owner Mehaboob Bagwan was called for and the complaint has been lodged against him. 4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 3, 7, 23 & 24 of EC Act. After receipt of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate took cognizance for the aforesaid offences. Taking exception to the same, the petitioner has filed this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that all the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 T.Thippeswamy son of Sanna Thippaiah and another Vs. State of Karnataka and another in Crl.P.No.5130/2023 disposed of on 29.08.2023 and in the case of Raheemsab and others Vs. The state of Karnataka and another in Crl.P.No.201480/2023 disposed of on 19.07.2023, wherein the identical issues have been raised and have been answered in favour of the petitioners therein. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5130/2023, has held at paragraph Nos.10 to 13, which are as follows: 10. The offense which has been alleged against the petitioners is for transporting rice allegedly meant for the Public Distribution System without valid license. For that particular purpose, it is required to prima facie establish that indeed the rice was belonging to the Public Distribution System and that the petitioners had no right over the same. It is but required that in respect of these prima facie evidence, the invoices and payment receipts, if any, produced by the petitioners/transporters would have to be verified by the Investigating Officer before filing a charge sheet. 11. In the present case, perusal of the charge sheet indicates that no such effort has been made and the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 invoices which are produced along with the present petition, which have been placed before the Investigating Officer have not been considered. 12. That apart, whether the rice belonged to the Public Distribution System or not could only be ascertained by necessary examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory and a report being submitted thereto. The Investigating Officer has not caused such an examination and has gone ahead with the sale of rice on the premise that the same is perishable goods which require immediate sale. Even if the goods are perishable, it is required for the Investigating Officer to send the said rice for necessary examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory and a report is to be obtained from the said authority. 13. In the present case, neither of the above have been done. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that there is no legs for the prosecution to stand on and prosecute the petitioners and prima facie there is nothing made out to establish the offense being committed by the petitioners. As such, there would be no purpose in prosecuting the petitioners on such frivolous grounds without any basis. 6. Learned High Court Government Pleader has not disputed the position of law as is observed in the case referred supra. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7857 CRL.P No. 101717 of 2025 7. In view of the issue in the lis standing answered by the judgment aforesaid quoted on all its force, the subject petition also deserves to be succeeded. For the aforesaid reason, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.247/2020 on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Jamkhandi, Bagalakote District for the offence punishable under Section 3, 7, 23 & 24 of EC Act stands quashed. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE EM /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 120