1 Reserved on : 10.02.2026 Pronounced on : 04.06.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3896 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.3596 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.3896 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1 . M/S.ESHWAR TRADERS ONION, POTATO MERCHANTS AND COMMISSION AGENTS, NO.190, ‘B’ BLOCK, DASANAPURA SUB-MARKET YARD, BENGALURU – 562 123. REPRESENTED BY ITS OWNER, S.BHOOPAL. 2 . S.BHOOPAL, S/O SUBRAMANYA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NARASIPURA, NEAR GANESHA TEMPLE, MATTA HALLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka 2 BENGALURU – 562 123. ... PETITIONERS (BY SMT.SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE) AND: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, YESHWANTHAPURA, BENGALURU – 562 123 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY, B.N.KRISHNAPPA ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI SWAROOP T., ADVOCATE ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE SAID ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.26218/2019 ON THE FILE OF IX ADDL.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU FOR VIOLATION OF OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 75, 78, 78A OF K.A.P.M. (R) ACT, COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.3596 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1 . M/S. SRI KENCHAMBA TRADERS PAOTATO, ONION, GINGER MERCHANTS AND COMMISSION AGENTS, NO.43, S.NO.B-14, BASEMENT, LORRY GODOWN ROAD, APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPURA BENGALURU – 560 022. 3 REPRESENTED BY ITS OWNER SRI B.L.JAGADEESH. 2 . SRI B.L.JAGADEESH S/O LAKSHMAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O NO.02, 13TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN ROAD, NEAR MUTTURAYA TEMPLE, T.DASARAHALLI BENGALURU – 560 057. ... PETITIONERS (BY SMT.SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE) AND: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE YASHWANTHAPURA BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI SWAROOP T., ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE SAID ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS, IN C.C.NO.26219/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IX A.C.M.M AT BENGALURU BETWEEN A.P.M.C AND KENCHAMBA TRADERS. THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 10.02.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 4 CAV ORDER Petitioners, in both these cases, are traders in different market yards of Bengaluru coming under the precincts of Agricultural Produce Market Committee (‘APMC’). Criminal Petition 3596 of 2023 calls in question proceedings in C.C.No.26219 of 2019 and Criminal Petition No.3896 of 2023 calls in question proceedings in C.C.No.26218 of 2019, both registered for offences punishable under Sections 75, 78 and 78A of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation & Development) Act, 1966 (‘the Act’ for short). Since the facts and issue being common, these petitions are taken up together and disposed by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts obtaining in Criminal Petition 3596 of 2023 would be narrated. 2. Heard Smt. Shilpa Rani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Swaroop T., learned counsel appearing for the respondent. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA 5 3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: - 3.1. In the year 2017 one B.L.Jagadeesh, accused No.1 in C.C.No.26219 of 2019, a licensed commission agent, sets up M/s Sri Kenchamba Traders, a trader of potato, onions and ginger in the APMC yard and is also allotted a shop-cum-godown No.191 at Dasanapura on lease and license basis. Towards the end of the year 2018, several traders failed to pay farmers’ dues due to a lock- down in the business. The farmers then complained to the APMC and thereupon the APMC issues notices to the petitioners to clear the dues payable to several farmers, two of whom had complained in C.C.No.26219 of 2019. On 08-03-2019 the APMC passed a resolution resolving to file a case against the petitioner for cancellation of the licence under Section 78A of the Act. In terms of the resolution, the licence granted to accused No.1 stood cancelled. 3.2. Contemporaneously, the APMC initiated two criminal cases by registering two separate private complaints against the accused in both the cases, both on 27-09-2019. Insofar as Criminal 6 Petition No.3596 of 2023 is concerned, the amount of recovery sought to be recovered was ₹4,37,000/- and Criminal Petition No.3896 of 2023 is concerned, the amount sought to be recovered was ₹2,55,000/-. In both the cases the recovery was for sale of onions and the farmers were not paid. On 04-10-2019, the concerned Court takes cognizance in both the cases and registers C.C.No.26219 of 2019 and C.C.26218 of 2019. After taking cognizance of the offence, the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.3896 of 2023 clears the dues of farmers which was quantified at ₹2,55,000/- on 04-05-2020 and submitted an acknowledgment of receipt of amount before the Secretary, APMC. Notwithstanding the same, it appears the allotment of go-down was cancelled which led the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.3896 of 2023 to file Writ Petition No.14052 of 2021 which comes to be allowed and the allocation stands restored. After the said restoration, the subject petition is preferred seeking quashment of entire proceedings in C.C.No.26218 of 2019. Identical challenge is made in the companion petition as well. 7 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the cases would submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaints. All the dues of farmers are paid on 04-05-2020 and 13-05-2020. Even then, the licence stood cancelled. A coordinate Bench of this Court on the score that entire amount has been paid has restored the licence of the go-down. For dishonor of cheques given to farmers or to the APMC to be delivered to the farmers it was always open to the APMC to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 but, the proceedings are initiated for offences punishable under the aforesaid Act. She further seeks to contend that default in payment to farmers was alleged against four commission agents and proceedings are initiated only against two. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel Sri Swaroop T., appearing for the APMC would vehemently refute the submissions in contending that resolution is passed to file a case against one commission agent and a resolution to initiate proceedings against others is pending before the Committee and the Committee would resolve to initiate proceedings against them as well. In the case at 8 hand, if the amount had been cleared immediately, there would have been no circumstance for initiation of any criminal prosecution against the traders. The amounts involved are that of farmers. The farmers amount if not paid in time, it would cause grave injustice to the farmers. The onions are sold in the year 2018. The amounts are cleared in the year 2020 that too after the concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence. Therefore, no lenience should be shown by quashment of proceedings, merely because the amounts are paid. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 7. The afore-narrated facts, dates and link in the chain of events are all a matter of record. The accused, in the cases at hand, are said to be licensed commission agents and have been allotted shops-cum-go-down in the respective APMC yards. The issue in the lis is with regard to non-payment of dues to farmers who had sold their onions to the accused through the APMC. Non- 9 payment of dues to farmers and consequences thereof are dealt with under the provisions of the Act. Certain provisions of the Act are germane to be noticed. They read as follows: “75. Payment of price.- (1) Subject to such deductions, if any as are authorized to be deducted according to this Act or the rules or the bye-laws or under any other law for the time being in force, by way of,- (i) fees; (ii) market charges; (iii) taxes; and (iv) the advances, if any, on the goods made as evidenced by authentic vouchers with interest which shall not be more than the rates charged by the Scheduled Banks if any, due thereon; the price of the goods sold in the market yard and outside the market or the sub-market in the market area shall be paid to the seller by the buyer in cash or cheque, immediately after the sale except in a case where a commission agent, if any, agrees in writing, in the form prescribed by the bye-laws, to give delivery to the buyer on credit of a term which shall in no case exceed the maximum period of credit prescribed by the bye-laws, if any. (2) In case buyer does not make payment under sub- section (1), he shall be liable to make additional payment at the rate of one percent per day of the total price of the notified agricultural produce payable to the seller within five days. (3) In case buyer does not make payment with additional payment to the seller under sub-section (1) and (2) above, within five days from the day of such purchase his licence or registration as the case may be shall be deemed to have been cancelled on the sixth day and he shall not be registered or granted any licence or permitted to operate in any market area within the State under this Act for a period of one year from the date of such cancellation. 10 … … … 78. 10 … … … 78. Commission agent's commission and responsibility.- (1) A commission agent shall recover his commission only from the buyer at such rates not exceeding two percent of the price, for which the agricultural produce is sold as may be specified in the bye-laws: Provided that in the case of agricultural produce like fruits, vegetables and flowers, a commission agent may charge commission at such rates not exceeding five percent of the price for which such agricultural produce is sold as may be specified in the bye-laws. (2) A commission Agent shall,- (a) arrange for the storage of the goods of the seller; (b) keep the goods of the seller in safe custody and adequately insured against fire, theft or flood, rain or any other natural calamities; and (c) pay the seller in cash the price of the goods as soon as such goods are sold. 78A. Additional Payment etc., by Commission Agent in case of default.- In case the commission agent does not make payment under clause (c) of subsection (2) of section 78, he shall be liable to make additional payment at the rate of one percent per day of the total price of the notified agricultural produce payable to the seller within five days, failing which his licence or registration as the case may be shall, liable to be cancelled on the sixth day and he shall not be registered or granted any licence or permitted to operate in any market area within the State under this Act for a period of one year from the date of such cancellation. … … … 84. Provision for settlement of disputes.- (1) For the purpose of settling disputes between producers, buyers and sellers, or their agents, including any disputes regarding the quality or weight of, or payment for, any agricultural produce, 11 or any matter in relation to the regulation of marketing, of agricultural produce in the market yard, market sub yard or sub market-yard, as the case may be the market committee of that area shall appoint a panel of arbitrators periodically consisting of agriculturists, traders and commission agents, and constitute a Disputes Committee from among its members in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) Rules shall be made regulating the procedure for settlement of disputes, the authority or authorities for settling the disputes and appeals from the decisions of such authorities, payment of fees by parties for settlement of disputes, by an arbitrator or arbitrators and all other matters connected with such settlement including the extent to which the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940, shall be applicable to arbitrations under this section. (3) Subject to the rules made under sub-section (2), a market committee may make bye-laws regulating the details in respect of settlement of disputes relating to transactions in notified agricultural produce in the market area. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be entertained by any court in respect of disputes referred to in sub-section (1), without the previous sanction of the market committee. … … … 117B. Penalty for contravention of section 75.- (1) If any person carrying on business in agricultural produce in the market yard, private market, spot exchange or farmers- consumer market fails to pay the price to the seller the price without any reasonable cause shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and with fine which may extend to twice the value of the price and in the case of continuing contravention with a further fine which may extend to rupees one thousand per day during which the contravention is continued after the first conviction. (2) Any person prosecuted under sub-section (1) shall not be absolved from his obligation of payment of price to the seller or any other amount due from him under this Act, rule, bye- laws or regulations 12 … … … 118A. Penalty for contravention of section 78.- (1) If any person carrying on business in notified agricultural produce as a commission agent in the market yard or private market fails to comply his duty as specified under clause (a) and (b) of sub-section (2) of section 78 without any reasonable cause he shall on conviction be punished with fine not exceeding rupees five thousand. (2) If any person carrying on business in notified agricultural produce as a commission agent in the market yard or private market fails to comply the responsibility of payment of price to the seller under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 78 without any reasonable cause shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and with fine which may extend to twice the value of the price and in the case of continuing contravention with a further fine which may extend to rupees one thousand per day during which the contravention is continued after the first conviction.” Section 75 deals with payment of price which includes fees, market charges and taxes. In case a buyer does not make any payment under sub-section (1) fine is to be imposed. Section 78 deals with Commission agent’s commission and responsibility. Section 84 deals with provision for settlement of disputes between producers, buyers and sellers or their agents including any disputes regarding the quality or weight of any agricultural produce. Section 117B deals with imposition of penalty for contravention of Section 75 and Section 118A deals with penalty for contravention of Section 78. 13 Section 78, as observed hereinabove, provides that a commission agent shall recover his commission only from the buyer at such rate not exceeding 2% for which the agricultural produce may be sold. A commission agent has certain duties, particularly to pay the seller in cash the price of goods as soon as such goods are sold. Section 118A prosecutes an agent who does not fulfill the conditions in Section 78 which includes paying the seller in cash the price of goods as soon as it is sold and if it not complied without any reasonable cause, the commission agent becomes open for prosecution. 8. In the teeth of the mandate of the statute, it becomes necessary to notice the link in the chain of events that have happened in the cases at hand. The admitted events are in the year 2018. The farmers sell their onions to the accused in both these cases. They are commission agents. The dues of the farmers are not paid. Notices were issued by the APMC on 05-02-2019 and 07-04-2018. Even then no amount is paid to the farmers. The APMC then resolves to initiate prosecution against the accused and to cancel licence under Section 78A of the Act. Even then no 14 compliance has come from the accused in the form of payment. Criminal cases are filed against the accused in both these cases on 27-09-2019. On 04-10-2019 the concerned Court is said to have taken cognizance of the offence and issued summons to the accused. The accused then wake up and clear the dues on 04-05- 2020 and 13-05-2020. Therefore, for the sale of onion by farmers through these commission agents, the amount is cleared only after close to 24 months of sale. 9. The projection by the learned counsel for the petitioners is, now that the amount is paid no criminal prosecution should lie. The said submission is, on the face of it, is unacceptable. If every commission agent would indulge in not clearing the dues of farmers, they would be put to great prejudice. The farmers who grow produce and seek to sell the produce in the yards of the APMC through the commission agent, live on the proceeds of those produce. Therefore, the commission agents who would dodge the farmers in not paying the amounts immediately after its sale in terms of the Act cannot be left of the hook, merely because they have made the payment during the pendency of criminal 15 proceedings. There is a delay of two years in making payment. It is ununderstandable as to how a farmer could survive without payment of close to ₹5/- lakhs for over two years. It is, therefore, the statute mandates that payment should be made immediately after issuance of notice. Even then, payment is not made in the cases at hand. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to project that onset of COVID-19 led the delay in payment. The said submission is noted only to be rejected. The onset of COVID-19 was from March 2020 but the payment was due since 2018. Therefore, the bogey of COVID-19 cannot be accepted and the action of the APMC cannot be found fault with. It is for the petitioners to come out clean in the trial. It is open to the concerned Court to take note of the developments that have taken place after registration of crimes. There is no warrant of interference in the cases at hand. 11. The resolution dated 03-06-2019 which resolved to initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioners reads as follows: 16
ಾಂಕ: 03-06-2019 ರಂದು ೆೆ 11.30 ಗಂೆೆ ೆಂಗಳರು, ಕೃ ಉತನ ಾರುಕೆ ಸಯ ಆಡ!ಾ"#ಾ$ಯವರ ಅಧ()!ೆಯ*+ ನ,ೆದ -ಾಾನ( ಸ.ೆಯ ನಡವಗಳ/. **** 0ಷಯ 11 ಈ #ೆಳಕಂಡ ವತ4ಕರು ಅವರ 5ೆಸ$ನ ಪಕ7ದ*+ ನಮೂ
:ರುವ ;ೈತ$ೆ ಈರು= ಾ;ಾಟ ಾ?ದ ಾ§ÄÛ ;ೈತರುಗೆ @ಾವಸAೇ ಇರುವ #ಾರಣ ಸದ$ಯವರ 0ರುದE ಸ)ಮ ಾ(Fಾಲಯದ*+ HಕದIJ ಹೂಡಲು ಸಯ @ಾ(ೇLನ*+ ವMೕಲ;ಾದ NOೕ P. ಸQರೂR ಇವರನು ೇ:#ೊಂಡು HಕದIJ ಹೂಡಲು 5ಾಗೂ ಾನ( SAೇ4ಶಕರ ಸು!ೊUೕVೆ ಅನQಯ #ಾನೂನು ಶುಲ7 @ಾವಸುವ ಕು$ತು. ೕಾ4ನ ಈ #ೆಳಕಂಡ ವತ4ಕರು ಅವರ 5ೆಸ$ನ ಪಕ7ದ*+ ನಮೂ
:ರುವ ;ೈತ$ೆ ಈರು= ಾ;ಾಟ ಾ?ದ ಾ§ÄÛ ;ೈತರುಗೆ @ಾವಸAೇ ಇರುವ #ಾರಣ ಸದ$ಯವರ ಅ"ಕೃತ ಪರWಾSಗಯನು ಈಾಗVೇ
ಾಂಕ: 8.03.2019ರಂದು ನ,ೆದ ಸ ಸ.ೆಯ ೕಾ4ನದಂ!ೆ ರದುIಪ?ಸVಾXರುತUAೆ. ಮುಂದುವ;ೆದು, ಸದ$ ವತ4ಕರ 0ರುದE ಸ)ಮ ಾ(Fಾಲಯದ*+ HಕದIJ ಹೂಡಲು ಸಯ @ಾ(ೆLನ*+ರುವ ವMೕಲ;ಾದ NOೕ P. ಸQರೂಪ ಇವರನು ೇ:#ೊಳ=ಲು 5ಾಗೂ ಾನ( SAೇ4ಶಕರ ಸು!ೊUೕVೆ ಅನQಯ #ಾನೂನು ಶುಲ7 @ಾವಸಲು ಒZ ೕಾ4SಸVಾ[ತು. PÀæ. ¸ÀA ವತ4ಕರ 5ೆಸರು 0\ಾಸ ;ೈತರ 5ೆಸರು @ಾವಸ ೇ#ಾದ ಾM HತU 1 J॥ #ೆಂ]ಾಂಬ ೆOೕಡ_4, ನಂ.191, ` ಾ+a, Aಾಸನಪbರ ಉಪ- ಾರುಕೆ @ಾOಂಗಣ, Aಾಸನಪbರ, ೆಂಗಳರು. 0.cಾಂತಕುಾd, 0.Wೆಂಕೇe, ರಂಗ-ಾQ, NOೕSWಾ_, 0ೕರಭದOಪ, `.ಎಂ. @ೇ-ಾQ ಮತುU ಎಂ.Sಜ*ಂಗಪ 4,37,000-00 2 J॥ ಈಶQd ೆOೕಡ_4 ನಂ.190, ` ಾ+a, Aಾಸನಪbರ ಉಪ-ಾರುಕೆ @ಾOಂಗಣ, Aಾಸನಪbರ, ೆಂಗಳರು. NOೕ ಆd.Nವಕುಾdೌಡ ಮತುU NOೕ Nವಕುಾd Pೕಟು 2,55,000-00 17 3 J।। ಸು;ೇe ೆOೕಡ_4, ನಂ.196, ` ಾ+a, Aಾಸನಪbರ ಉಪ-ಾರುಕೆ @ಾOಂಗಣ, Aಾಸನಪbರ, ೆಂಗಳರು. NOೕ AೇWೇಂದO :ಂj 1,61,790-00 4 J॥ ಆಯುk ಅಂl ಕಂಪS, ನಂ.79, ` ಾ+a, Aಾಸನಪbರ ಉಪ- ಾರುಕೆ @ಾOಂಗಣ, Aಾಸನಪbರ, ೆಂಗಳರು. NOೕ ಾಂೇe -ೋನು #ಾZ4 9,80,000-00 ಸm/- ಸm/- #ಾಯ4ದN4 ಆಡ!ಾ"#ಾ$ಗಳ/ ಕೃಉಾಸ, ೆಂಗಳರು. ಕೃಉಾಸ, ೆಂಗಳರು.” The resolution is to initiate proceedings against four traders, but, as is contended, proceedings are initiated only against two traders. The learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that criminal cases would be initiated against other traders as well. The submission is placed on record. Therefore, liberty is reserved to the respondent to initiate proceedings, in terms of the resolution, against other traders who have dodged payment to farmers in accordance with law and if available in law. 18 12. With the aforesaid observations, finding no merit in these petitions, these petitions stand dismissed. It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order are only for the purpose of consideration of cases of the petitioners under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and the same shall not bind or influence the proceedings pending before the concerned Court. Interim order, if any subsisting, shall stand dissolved. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Bkp CT:MJ