- 1 -
CRL.P No. 101835 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101835 OF 2022 (482)
BETWEEN:
PRABHU S/O NAGAPPA BABLI,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESSMEN,
R/O.DEVI BAR,
NEAR FCI GODOWN,
TQ: KOPPAL, DIST.KOPPAL-588321.
&PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MANOJ B. & SRI. ANAND R.KOLLI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH,
AT DHARWAD, (THROUGH KOPPAL RURAL
POLICE STATION).
&RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 24.11.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL
CIVIL
JUDGE
AND
JMFC,
KOPPAL
AT
KOPPAL
IN
C.C.NO.1353/2020 FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 34 OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, 1965, IN CRIME
NO.135/2020 REGISTERED BY THE KOPPAL RURAL POLICE
STATION FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 34
Digitally
signed by
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
- 2 -
CRL.P No. 101835 of 2022
OF KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, 1965, BY ALLOWING THE
CRIMINAL PETITION.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Heard leaned counsel, Sri Manoj B., for the petitioner
and
learned
High
Court
Government
Pleader
for
respondent-State.
2.
This petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. with the following prayer.
<To quash the impugned order dated
24.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional Civil
Judge
and
Koppal
at
Koppal
in
C.C.No.1353/2020 for an offence punishable
under Section 34 of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965,
in Crime No.135/2020 registered by the Koppal
Rural Police Station for an offence punishable u/s
34 of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, by allowing the
criminal petition.=
3.
Brief facts of the case are as under:
Petitioner has been charge sheeted for the offence
punishable under Section 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act
and summons have been issued and the same is under
- 3 -
challenge. The gist of the complaint averments reveal that
when the complainant was on duty, he received credible
information stating that on 26.06.2020 at about 2.00 p.m.
in Halvarthi village near Dabha owned by one Manjunath
Karadiguddat in a public place, some person were
indulged in sale of liquor. On credible information, head of
the raid party along with panch witnesses went to the spot
and were on watch and on confirmation, raided and
captured the person who was indulged in selling of the
liquor sachets illegally and he is arraigned as accused No.1
in the charge sheet. Further, the police investigated and
based on the information collected by the police, accused
No.2 has also been arraigned as additional accused in the
case and he has also been charge sheeted. The action of
the police is challenged in the present petition.
4.
Reiterating the grounds urged in the petition,
Sri
Manoj
B.,
learned
counsel
for
the
petitioner
vehemently contended that in the absence of any
incriminatory materials found against accused No.2, he
- 4 -
has been falsely implicated by the police in order to harass
him and therefore, sought for allowing the petition.
5.
Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader submits that, in the charge sheet materials
necessary
information
has
been
gathered
by
the
investigating agency to establish nexus between the
petitioner and the incident and therefore, sought for
dismissal of the petition.
6.
Perused the material on record meticulously, in
the light of rival contentions of the parties.
7.
Admittedly on the day of the raid, the police
were only able to catch accused No.1, where he was found
selling the liquor sachets kept in box. Subsequent thereto,
the police investigated the matter and filed charge sheet
against the present petitioner also. The charge sheet
materials do not indicate that, the liquor sachets seized by
the head of the raid party on the date of raid were in fact
supplied by accused No.2 from the Devi Wine Shop,
- 5 -
Kavalur. No other material is forthcoming so as to proceed
against the petitioner.
8.
The investigation agency has not collected any
material to establish that the sold liquor packets are
actually purchased from petitioner9s shop or belongs to
petitioner. Under such circumstances, in the absence of
nexus, criminal action is impermissible.
9.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed
reliance on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court dated 02.07.2020 passed in Crl.P.No.100827/2019
and connected matters. In the said case, Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court has referred to other judgments of Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in paragraph Nos.10, 11 and
13 of its judgment. For ready reference paragraph Nos.10,
11 and 13 are extracted hereunder.
<10. In a decision reported in (2013) 1
KCCR 334 case of K.Ramachandra Reddy Vs.
State of Karnataka by the Station House
Officer & Another, it is observed as under:
- 6 -
"23. The position in law will have to be
referred to at this juncture. This Court, in the
case M/s. Vijaya Bank Vs. State by the Labour
Enforcement Officer, reported in ILR 2000
Karnataka
4773,
has
held
that
taking
cognizance of an offence being a judicial act
after
application
of
kind,
t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.