- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1058 CRL.P No. 102247 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102247 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: GURURAJ S/O. SHEKHAPPA UPPIN AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESSMAN, R/O. ITAGI, TQ. RANEBENNUR, HAVERI-581110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.L. VANTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI RANEBENNUR RURAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH-580001. 2. MALATESH S/O. CHANABASAPPA MEGALMANI AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. GOVT. OFFICIAL NON GAZETTED, R/O. RANEBENNUR, HAVERI, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CC NO.957/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RANEBENNUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.27 16:35:14 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1058 CRL.P No. 102247 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner/accused is sought to be prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 2. The case of the prosecution is that, upon receiving credible information, a raid was conducted on a godown belonging to the petitioner/accused. During the search, it was discovered that the petitioner/accused had unauthorizedly stocked rice meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System (PDS). 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1- State. 4. It is admitted that rice was seized from the godown of the petitioner/accused and that the rice was allegedly meant for distribution under the PDS. However, the prosecution has not placed any material along with the charge sheet to establish that the rice seized from the accused was actually intended for PDS distribution. 5. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No. 200775/2023 and connected petitions, disposed of on 05.07.2023, at paragraphs 12 to 16, has held as follows: “12. Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016 deals with powers of entry, search, seizure, etc. The Authorized Officer under Rule 19, if - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1058 CRL.P No. 102247 of 2024 he has reason to believe that there is any contravention of the provisions of this order, or to secure compliance with this order, or to satisfy himself that there is or has been any contravention of the order, or to obtain information that would help in detecting or preventing contravention of the provisions of this order or diversion of PDS commodities, may require the owner, occupier, or any other person in charge of any place, premises, vehicle, or vessel in which such contravention is believed to have occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur, to cooperate. 13. Clause (2) of Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016 specifies that the provisions of Section 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), relating to search and seizure, shall apply to searches and seizures conducted under this clause. 14. A conjoint reading of Section 10A of the Essential Commodities Act and Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016 indicates that, if the Food Inspector has reason to believe that there has been contravention of the provisions of the Control Order, 2016, he may conduct search and seizure of a vehicle or premises in which it is alleged that food grains meant for distribution under the PDS are being transported or stored unauthorizedly. 15. Though the offences under the Act are cognizable, Rule 19 of the Control Order, 2016 empowers the Authorized Officer to conduct search and seizure to satisfy himself that there has been a contravention of the order. There is no requirement for the Authorized Officer to register an FIR before conducting the search and seizure of food grains meant for distribution under the PDS. 16. Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. specifies that, whenever any place liable to search or inspection under this chapter is closed, any person residing in or being in charge of such place shall, on demand of the officer executing the warrant, and upon production of the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1058 CRL.P No. 102247 of 2024 warrant, allow free ingress and afford all reasonable facilities for a search therein.” 6. In the instant case, the search was conducted at a godown belonging to the petitioner/accused. However, as per Section 100 of the Cr.P.C., the Food Inspector was required to obtain a search warrant from the jurisdictional Magistrate before conducting the search. 7. In light of the above, the impugned proceedings for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.957/2019 pending on the file of the Prl. Senior civil Judge and JMFC, Ranebennur, insofar as it relates to the petitioner – accused stands quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE AC Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6