Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.Krishna Kumar
Manjunath .R S/O. A. Raghavendra – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka By Karnataka Excise Department – Respondent
ORDER :
S.R.Krishna Kumar, J.
In this petition, the petitioner-accused seeks quashing of the impugned proceedings in C.C. No.23017/2021 on the file of the Hon’ble XXXVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 14 , Section 15 , Section 32 , Section 38A and Section 43 of the KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT , 1965, and Section 273 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for Respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. Respondent No.2 has been served with notice, but has chosen to remain unrepresented.
3. In addition to reiterating the contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, before conducting the impugned search and seizure on 22nd November, 2019, whereby, the respondents are alleged to have seized the alcohol from the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the respondents to either obtain a warrant or record reasons to believe in writing so as to dispense with obtaining of warrant as mandated under Section 54 of the KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT . In this context, it is submitted that, in th
Failure to comply with mandatory provisions regarding search and seizure under the Karnataka Excise Act leads to quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings.
Procedural non-compliance regarding search warrant requirements under the Karnataka Excise Act invalidates arrest and seizure proceedings, necessitating the quashing of the related FIR.
Procedural non-compliance with search warrant requirements under the Karnataka Excise Act vitiates the FIR and subsequent proceedings.
Non-compliance with statutory provisions regarding search warrants in liquor-related cases leads to quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings.
A conviction based on statutory non-compliance regarding search and seizure procedures and the improper registration of an F.I.R. is void, necessitating acquittal of the accused.
The Arunachal Pradesh Excise Act, 1993 supersedes the CrPC regarding investigations, prohibiting police from registering FIRs for offences under the Act.
Failure to comply with mandatory search procedures under the A.P. Excise Act vitiates criminal proceedings, constituting an abuse of process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
