- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:395 CRL.P No. 102294 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102294 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. DEVARAJ S/O BALAPPA BALEKUNDRI, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: BENACHINAMARADI, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 109. 2. VISHWAJEET S/O DEEPAK PATIL, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SHAHPUR, BELAGAVI, TQ/DIST: BELAGAVI-590 003. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH UDYAMBAG POLICE STATION. 2. MALLAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA GANAGI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI-591 309. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.28/2024 (CRIME NO.0041 OF 2023) REGISTERED BY UDYAMBAG POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITY ACT 1955, PENDING BEFORE THE JMFC IV BELAGAVI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.21 07:28:44 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:395 CRL.P No. 102294 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioners challenge the cognizance taken of the offences punishable under Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 3. The case of the prosecution is that, upon receiving credible information, respondent No.2 intercepted a vehicle belonging to accused No.1. During inspection, it was allegedly discovered that the petitioners were transporting rice meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System (PDS) without proper authorization. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 5. Admittedly, respondent No.2 has not produced any substantive evidence to establish that the rice being transported was meant for distribution under the PDS, nor has the rice been sent for forensic examination. In similar circumstances, a coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.102147/2023 held as follows: “10. The offence alleged against the petitioners pertains to the transportation of rice purportedly meant for the Public Distribution System without valid authorization. To establish a prima - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:395 CRL.P No. 102294 of 2024 facie case, it is essential to show that the rice indeed belonged to the Public Distribution System and that the petitioners had no lawful authority over it. For this purpose, invoices and payment receipts produced by the petitioners/transporters must be scrutinized by the Investigating Officer before filing the charge sheet. 11. In the present case, a review of the charge sheet reveals that no such efforts were made. The invoices produced along with the petition, which were submitted to the Investigating Officer, have not been adequately considered. 12. Moreover, whether the rice belonged to the Public Distribution System could only be determined by obtaining a report from the Forensic Science Laboratory. However, the Investigating Officer neither conducted such an examination nor sought a forensic report. Instead, the rice was sold on the premise that it was a perishable item requiring immediate disposal. Even if the goods are perishable, it is incumbent upon the Investigating Officer to send the rice for necessary forensic examination and obtain an appropriate report. 13. In the absence of such efforts, the prosecution lacks the evidentiary basis to substantiate its allegations. Therefore, pursuing the prosecution on such grounds would be baseless and unjustified.” 6. In the present case, there is no substantive evidence to establish that the rice was meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System. As such, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:395 CRL.P No. 102294 of 2024 ORDER i) The petition stands allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.28/2024 pending on the file learned JMFC IV Belagavi, insofar as it relates to the accused No.1 and 2 is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 28