IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 670 OF 2017 BETWEEN:

MR. CHUKARU AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O LATE BHATYA MUGERA R/AT BAIKODI MOOLE HOUSE MANDEKOLU VILLAGE SULLIA TALUK, D.K. - 574 251.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI KETHAN KUMAR, ADV.)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SPECIAL POLICE STATION EXECISE ENFORCEMENT AND LOTTERY PROHIBITION SPECIAL SQUAD, BANDAR, MANGALURU REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT Digitally signed by NANDINI M (BY SRI CHANNAPPA EERAPPA, HCGP)

S Location: H IGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.05.2017 IN CRL.A.NO.77/2015 PASSED BY THE PRL. S.J., D.K., MANGALORE CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALORE DATED 10.02.2015 IN C.C.NO.443/2014.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused is before this Court in this revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.PC with a prayer to set-aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in CC No.443/2014 by the Court of Principal Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada, dated 10.02.2015 which is confirmed in Crl.A.No.77/2015 by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, by judgment and order dated 04.05.2017.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Petitioner herein was charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a)(f), 32 and 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (for short, 'the Act') and was tried for the said offences in CC No.443/2014. It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.05.2011 at about 09.20 a. m., based on credible information received, police attached to Special Police Station Excise Enforcement and Lottery Prohibition Special Squad, Mangaluru, had travelled to Baikadi Moole of Mandeklu Village in Sullia Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District along with panch witnesses and had apprehended the petitioner, who was in possession of five litres of illicit liquor in a can, which he allegedly had manufactured. The seized contraband was subjected to panchanama and thereafter, accused and the contraband were brought to the police station and FIR was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.32/2011 for the aforesaid offences. After completing investigation, charge sheet was filed against him.

4. Petitioner who had appeared before the Trial Court in response to the summons received by him in CC.No.443/2014, had claimed to be tried.

5. The prosecution in order to prove its charges against the petitioner, had examined eight charge-sheet witnesses as PW-1 to PW-8 and got marked seven documents as Exs.P-1 to P-7. One material object was marked as MO-1. No oral or documentary evidence was led on behalf of the defence.

6. The Trial Court after hearing the arguments addressed on both sides, convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(f) and Section 34 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence was confirmed in Crl.A.No.77/2015 by the Court of Prl. Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangaluru, vide judgment and order dated 04.05.2017. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is before this Court.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution has failed to prove compliance of Sections 53 & 54 of the Act in the present case, which is mandatory. Therefore, the entire seizure gets vitiated. The courts below were therefore not justified in convicting the petitioner for the alleged offences.

8. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition. However, he was