- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:333 CRL.P No. 102503 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102503 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: VIJAYKUMAR S/O. CHANDRASHEKAR MATTI AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER R/O. NALWAD GALLI, TQ.DIST. GADAG-582101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA GADAG RURAL POLICE STATION, GADAG, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBILC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE COGNIZANCE DATED 22.12.2023 AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER AS INITIATED BY GADAG RURAL POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.307/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF 2 ND ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC II COURT AT GADAG IN CC NO.1648/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 3, 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 AND SECTION 18 OF PDS CONTROLLING ORDER, 2016. 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 ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.13 15:17:10 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:333 CRL.P No. 102503 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, who is facing charges under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Clause 18 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Public Control Order, 2016, is before this Court. 2. The prosecution’s case is that the Food Inspector intercepted the petitioner’s vehicle based on credible information, and upon search, discovered that the petitioner was transporting 32 quintals and 65 kgs of rice meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System (PDS) 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue in this case is covered by a decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5130/2023, disposed of on 29.08.2023, which held as follows: I) The Food Shirastedar, who is the de facto complainant, informed the concerned PSI at Rampura Police Station about credible information and lodged a written complaint. The vehicle was subsequently stopped, and it was alleged that the contents of the goods in the vehicle, rice worth approximately Rs.45,000/- in 45 gunny bags and rice in 170 plastic bags worth about Rs.1,36,000/-, were meant for the Public Distribution System. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:333 CRL.P No. 102503 of 2024 II) A complaint was registered in Crime No.172/2016 under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. A mahazar was conducted, and after investigation, a charge sheet was filed on 08.05.2017, which is now under challenge in these proceedings. III) The petitioners had previously approached this Court in Crl.P.No.2048/2018, disposed of on 26.09.2022, in terms of the order passed in Crl.P.No.9689/2016. IV) The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that paragraph No.14 of the order in Crl.P.No.9689/2016 was not complied with, and thus the charge sheet should be quashed. V) The learned Additional SPP, however, submitted that in Crl.P.No.2048/2018, the petitioners failed to inform this Court that the charge sheet had already been filed on 08.05.2017. Therefore, the direction in paragraph No.14 of the order in Crl.P.No.9689/2016 could not be complied with, as the charge sheet had already been laid and the seized material had already been auctioned. As a result, the forensic verification required by the order could not be carried out. VI) Upon hearing the parties and reviewing the documents, the issue is whether the rice in question indeed belonged to the Public Distribution System and whether the petitioners had any right over it. To establish this, the invoices and payment receipts, if any, produced by the petitioners, must be verified by the Investigating Officer before filing the charge sheet. VII) The charge sheet indicates that no such effort was made, and the invoices provided by the petitioners were not considered by the Investigating Officer. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:333 CRL.P No. 102503 of 2024 VII) Moreover, the question of whether the rice belonged to the Public Distribution System could only be determined by the necessary examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory and the submission of a report. The Investigating Officer did not carry out such an examination and instead proceeded with the sale of the rice on the grounds of it being perishable. Even if the goods are perishable, the rice should have been sent for forensic examination before disposal. VIII) In this case, neither of these procedures were followed. Therefore, it is my considered opinion that the prosecution has no grounds to proceed with the case, as there is no prima facie evidence to establish that the petitioners committed any offense. There is no basis for prosecuting the petitioners on such frivolous grounds. 5. The co-ordinate Bench considers that rice that was seized during the search by the Food Inspector was not sent to FSL as is required in law to determine as to whether the rice was procured or taken from the Public Distribution System without any valid license or otherwise. The case at hand is also akin to what is determined by the Co-ordinate Bench as rice in the case at hand is not sent to FSL as was necessary in law. 6. In the light of issue being answered in favour of the accused therein, on the very reason that is rendered by the Co- ordinate Bench supra, the petition which raises on identical issue and has in it identical facts, deserves to be succeed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:333 CRL.P No. 102503 of 2024 For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a) The petition is allowed. b) The impugned proceedings in CC No.1648/2023 (arising out of Gadag Rural PS Crime No.307/2023) pending on the file of learned II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC-II, Gadag, are hereby quashed. c) Pending applications, if any, are disposed off as not surviving for consideration. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40