Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 2546
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA, J
Raju Naik S/o. Samya Naik, – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100041 OF 2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :MISS PRIYANKA Y. UPADHYA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SRINAND A. PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent: SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP
The court upheld the conviction for illegal liquor transportation, affirming that procedural lapses did not invalidate the prosecution's case.
Headnote:(A) Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 - Section 32(i) - Conviction for illegal transportation of liquor - Accused convicted and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- - Appeals dismissed by Sessions Court - Revision petitioners challenged conviction citing procedural lapses and hostile witnesses - Court upheld conviction, finding no legal infirmity or factual error. (Paras 2, 11, 23, 29)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313 - Accused failed to provide defense evidence or written submissions - Court noted that mere hostility of a witness does not invalidate prosecution case. (Paras 9, 18)
Facts of the case:
The accused were convicted for transporting 192 bottles of liquor without a license, following a raid where they were apprehended with the illicit liquor. (Paras 3.1, 3.2, 22)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution established the seizure of liquor and upheld the conviction, stating that the samples drawn were sufficient for testing. (Paras 17, 23)
Issues: The main issues were whether the conviction suffered from legal infirmity and whether the sentence was excessive. (Paras 16, 29)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's case was not undermined by the hostility of a witness and that the samples drawn were adequate for the case. (Paras 17, 23)
Result: Criminal Revision petition dismissed.
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
Heard Kum.Priyanka Y. Upadhya for Srinand A. Pachhapure and learned High Court Government Pleader Praveena Y.Devareddiyavara for accused.
2. Accused suffered an order of conviction in CC No.645/2011 for the offences punishable under Section 32 (i) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (for short hereinafter called as ‘K.E.Act’) and ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- which got confirmed in Crl.A.No.5008/2013 and 5014/2014 are the revision petitioners.
3. Facts in nutshell for disposal of the criminal revision petition are as under:
3.1 The Police Sub-inspector, Excise, Hadagali Range filed charge sheet against the accused-revision petitioners and another accused for the offences punishable under Section 32(i) and 38A of Excise Act, 1965. Material facts which lead to filing of the charge sheet are as under:
3.2 On 29.09.2010 complainant along with CW.4 and five others had visited Itagi village for patrolling duty. While so discharging patrolling duty, at 9.30 p.m., they received credible information that some persons are illegally transporting the liquor from Hospet to Davanagere. Accordingly a raid team was formed comprising of complainant and other staff members by securing two persons to act as panchas. Team visited Mahajanadahalli village cross. Two persons were found proceeding on a motorcycle. On suspicion, motorcycle was intercepted by the complainant and other persons of raid party. Two wooden boxes were being carried on the motorcycle. Accused after seeing the Police officials, tried to escape. But complainant and other members of the raid team were successful in apprehending them.
3.3 On enquiry, they revealed their names and they did not offer proper explanation with regard to the contents of the wooden boxes. On suspicion wooden boxes were opened and they found 192 liquor bottles of the label ‘Royal Gold cup’. The same was seized in the presence of panchas. Samples were drawn from 28 bottles randomly from the whole lot.
3.4 Complainant thereafter took them to his custody. Motorcycle on which the revision petitioners were moving bearing No.KA 35/Q-1413 and a mobile hand set were also taken into custody. They enquired about the license to transport the liquor bottles and both the persons submitted that they do not have license. As such the head of the ride party treated them as illicit liquor and seized the same by drawing a panchanama.
4. Thereafter, they visited the Excise police station and registered the case in Excise Case No.09/10-11. The accused persons were arrested and then sent to judicial custody. Thereafter, seized materials were sought to be retained by them for the purpose of investigation.
5. Sri Hanumanth Guttedar conducted the further investigation and sent the seized samples for FSL examination and concluded the investigation and filed charge sheet against three persons including revision petitioners.
6. Presence of the accused persons was secured and charges were framed. Accused persons pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial was held.
7. In order to bring the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution proceeded to examine 8 witnesses as PWs1 to 8 comprising of head of the ride party, panchas, sub-staffs and the investigating officer and the FSL officer.
8. As many as 7 documents were placed on record which are exhibited and marked as Exhibit P1 to P7. Seized sample bottles 38 in numbers were placed on record and marked as M.O.1 to M.O.38.
9. On conclusion of recording of evidence, accused statement as is contemplated under Section 313 of Cr.P.C . was recorded, wherein accused persons have denied the incriminating materials but failed to offer the written submission as is contemplated under Section 313 (4) of Cr.P.C . nor placed any defense evidence.
10. Thereafter, the learned trial judge heard the arguments of the parties and by considered judgment dated 23.09.2013 convicted accused Nos.1 and 2 and acquitted the
