2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 18432
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
VENKATESH NAIK T, J
SHRISHAIL S/O. BASAPPA ANGADI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103336 OF 2024 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI ROHIT N. LATUR
For the Respondents: SHRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL
Authority to enforce the Essential Commodities Act lies with designated officers, not police, rendering illegal seizure null.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Seizure of foodgrains by police - Petition to quash proceedings - Court held that the powers to enforce the Essential Commodities Act lie with authorized officers, not police; hence, seizure was illegal. (Paras 2 to 6)
(B) Appeal - The court expressed the necessity to quash proceedings if initiated without jurisdiction or authority, protecting against abuse of process. (Paras 5 and 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner seeks to quash FIR for illegal seizure of essential commodities meant for schools - The police claim unauthorized access to participate in this enforcement.
Findings of Court:
Proceedings quashed due to lack of jurisdiction by police in enforcement, emphasizing the need for proper authority in action.
Issues: The main issues were the enforcement jurisdiction under the Essential Commodities Act and the legality of police seizure actions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that jurisdiction for such actions rests solely with designated officers under the Essential Commodities Act, not law enforcement. This emphasizes judicial protection against procedural abuses.
Result: Criminal petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial authority in quashing abusive prosecution. (Para 2 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. jurisdiction concerning enforcement principles in food regulation. (Para 4) |
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
Heard Sri Rohit N. Latur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Abhishek Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. The petitioner/accused No.2 has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings initiated against him in Crime No.34/2024 of Bagalkote Cen Crime Police Station on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Bagalakote, for the offences punishable under Sections 314, 316(1) 31, 6(2), 316(3), 318(1), 318(2), 318(3) read with Section 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act , 1955. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
On 04.10.2024, the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Bagalkote CEN Crime Police Station received a credible information about transportation of cooking oil, milk powder and ragi powder illegally and stored the same in the house of accused No.1, which was meant for distribution on free of cost to the children at various schools under “Kshira Bhagya Scheme” for wrongful gain. Thus he went to spot and he intercepted the same and seized 140 bags of milk powder containing 25 milk packets in each bag, 13 bags of ragi powders weighing 25 kg each bag, 5 boxes of cooking oil, 4 bags of ration control rice weighing 50 Kgs. each bag. Thus, he registered suo moto case in Crime No.34/2024 for the aforesaid offences. Taking exception of the same, the petitioners have filed this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue in the subject criminal petition stands covered by the judgments rendered by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Criminal Petition No.102201/2019 disposed of on 02.02.2022, Criminal Petition No.4233/2016 disposed of on 18.08.2016, Criminal Petition No.101518/2017 disposed of on 06.02.2019 and Criminal Petition No.3790/2012 c/w Criminal Petition No.3708/2012 disposed of on 06.07.2015 which has been followed by several other Benches. This Court in Criminal Petition No.4233/2016 has held as follows:
“3. As on 16.5.2016 a case has been registered in Crime No.230/2016 by the Sub-Inspector, Challakere Police Station, within the jurisdiction of the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Challakere and therefore the petitioners are before this Court.
4. The learned counsel Sri S.P.Kulkarni would contend that insofar as enforcement of the Essential Commodities Act is concerned, there are specific provisions under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992, which are applicable to the present case on hand. Paragraph 19 thereof provides as follows:
19. Powers of Entry, Search, Seizure, etc.:
(1) The Director of Food and Civil Supplies, the Joint Directors of Food and Civil Supplies, or the Tahsildar of a taluk, and Authorized Authority or any other officer of the Department of Food and Civil Supplies not below the rank of a Food Inspector within their jurisdiction may with such assistance, if any, as he thinks fit and if he has reason to believe that there is or has been any contravention of the provisions of this order or with a view to securing compliance with this order or to satisfying himself that there is or has been any contravention of the order:
(a) require the owner, occupier or any other person in charge of any place, premises, vehicle or vessel in which he has reason to believe that any contravention of the provisions of this order or of the conditions of any authorization issued there under has been, is being or is about to be committed, to produce any books, accounts or other documents showing transactions relating to such contraventions:
(b) enter, inspect or break open and search any place or premises, vehicle or vessel in which he has reason to believe that any contravention of the