- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27317 CRL.RP No. 1345 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1345 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER CUM DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KARNATAKA EXCISE DEPARTMENT, 4TH CROSS, LEFT SIDE JCR EXTENSION, CHITRADURGA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.M.R.PATIL.,HCGP) AND: 1. THE ADMINISTRATIVE MEDICAL OFFICER, REPRESENTED BY DR. AMBARISH, MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIAMARY HEALTH CENTER, R/O H D PURA, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577526. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.,) THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC BY THE SPP FOR THE STATE PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.66 Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27317 CRL.RP No. 1345 of 2021 OF 2020 DATED 06.02.2021 ON THE FILE OF THE I- ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA AND OTHERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL ORDER The State has preferred this Criminal Revision Petition against the Order passed by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) in Criminal Appeal No.66/2020, dated 06.02.2021. 2. Heard on admission. 3. The brief facts leading to this revision petition are that the Chitrahalli Gate Police have filed a case against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 32, 34 of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 and under Section 269 of IPC. During the course of the investigation, the Chitrahalli Gate Police has seized the vehicle bearing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27317 CRL.RP No. 1345 of 2021 No.KA-16-G-591. It is alleged that the accused was using the vehicle for shifting patients in emergency. The Range Inspector of Excise, Holalkere has reported the seizure of the vehicle bearing No.KA-16-G-591 in PRCR/17/2019-20 dated 15.07.2020 as the driver of the ambulance was transporting liquor in this vehicle. The Authorized Officer has passed an order to confiscate this vehicle. Being aggrieved by this Order, the respondent/Administrative Medical Officer preferred an appeal before the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga in Criminal Appeal No.66/2020 and the same came to be allowed on 06.02.2021. Being aggrieved by this Order, the State has preferred this revision petition. 4. Sri M.R.Patil, the learned High Court Government Pleader, would submit that the vehicle was meant for shifting the emergency patients and victims. But the vehicle was used for transporting the liquors unauthorizedly. Hence, the order of the Authorized Officer - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27317 CRL.RP No. 1345 of 2021 and Deputy Commissioner is just and proper and sought for allowing this revision petition. 5. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Appellate Court makes it clear that the investigating agency has not filed the charge sheet against the accused. The State has also not disclosed whether the seizure of the properties are reported to the jurisdictional magistrate as contemplated under Section 102 of the Cr.PC and also the provisions of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. The Investigating Officer has not made any allegation against the owner of the vehicle, alleging that the owner of the vehicle, knowingly permit it to be used for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 32, 33, 34, 36 and 37 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. Absolutely, there are no materials placed before the Court to constitute the offence under Section 38A of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. Since there are no materials, the Appellate Court has properly appreciated the materials on record and allowed the appeal. Even on re-examination of the entire - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27317 CRL.RP No. 1345 of 2021 materials placed before me, I do not find any error/legal infirmities in the impugned order passed by the Appellate Court. Being devoid of merit, the revision petition stands dismissed at admission stage itself. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13