IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100231 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

UMARSAB S/O. ABDULSATTAR MULAGUND AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESSMEN, R/AT. JANNATH NAGAR, 2^ND CROSS, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KASABAPETH POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO, QUASH THE COGNIZANCE DATED Digitally signed by B K 04.02.2024 AGAINST THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER IN KASABAPETH MAHENDRAKUMAR B M A K HENDRAKUMAR L C K o A O c R U a N t R i A o T n T O : A F H K I A GH P.S. CRIME NO.124/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL.CIVIL DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.25 JUDGE AND JMFC-III, AT HUBBALLI IN CC NO.1289/2024 FOR THE

11:20:41 +0530 OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 AND U/S 3 AND 18 OF KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM)

PUBLIC CONTROL ORDER 2016.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

ORAL ORDER

1. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent/State.

2. The petitioner has been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and Clauses 3 and 18 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the “PDS Control Order”).

3. The case of the prosecution is that, upon receiving credible information that rice meant for distribution under the Public Distribution System (PDS) was stored in a godown without a permit, a raid was conducted. During the search, it was discovered that the petitioner was in unauthorized possession of rice meant for PDS distribution.

4. Admittedly, the prosecution has not produced any material to substantiate that the seized rice was meant for PDS distribution. Furthermore, no warrant was obtained from the jurisdictional Magistrate, as mandated under Clause 19 of the PDS Control Order. The issue involved in this petition has been examined by this Court in Crl.P.No.200775/2023 and connected petitions. Vide order dated 5.7.2023, this Court made the following observations:

5. The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was enacted in the public interest to regulate the production, supply, and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain essential commodities.

6. Section 3 of the Act empowers the government to control the production, supply, and distribution of essential commodities.

7. Section 7 provides penalties for individuals who contravene orders issued under Section 3 of the Act.

8. Section 10A specifies that offences under the Act are cognizable in nature.

9. Section 11 deals with the cognizance of offences and stipulates that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under the Act except on a written report of the facts constituting the offence, filed either by a public servant as defined under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code or by any person aggrieved or a recognized consumer association, whether or not the aggrieved person is a member of the association.

10. Simply put, a Court can take cognizance of an offence under this Act only upon receiving a written report of the facts from a public servant or a report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) filed by the officer in charge of the police station after investigation. In the instant case, the Food Inspector, who is the Authorized Officer under the PDS Control Orders of 1992 and 2016, conducted the search and seizure of food grains/rice allegedly meant for PDS distribution.

11. The State Government, in exercise of its powers under sub-section