Heard leaned counsel, Sri Shivaraj S Balloli for the

petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader

for respondent-State.

This petition is filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C. with the following prayer.

“To quash the proceedings in Crime No. 389

of 2015 by the Raibag Police Station in C.C.No. 417

of 2016 on the file of the Prl. JMFC Raibag insofar

as the petitioners are concerned for the offences

punishable under Sections 32, 34, 41 of the

Karnataka Excise Act 1965.”

3.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

Petitioners have been charge sheeted for the

offences punishable under Sections 32, 34 and 41 of the

Karnataka Excise Act and summons have been issued and

- 3 -

the same is under challenge. The gist of the complaint

averments reveal that when the complainant was on duty,

he received credible information stating that near Kanaka

Circle, Savasuddi village, some persons have 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

Nos.2 and 3 have also been arraigned as additional

accused in the case and they have also been charge

sheeted. The action of the police is challenged in the

present petition.

4.

Reiterating the grounds urged in the petition,

Sri Shivaraj S Balloli, leaned counsel for the petitioners

vehemently contended that in the absence of any

- 4 -

incriminatory materials found against accused Nos.2 and

3, they have been falsely implicated by the police in order

to harass them 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

petitioners and the incident and therefore, sought for

dismissal of the petition.

6.

Perused the materials on record meticulously,

in the light of the rival contentions of the parties.

7.

Admittedly, on the day of the raid, the police

were only able to catch accused No.1 near Kanaka Circle,

Savasuddi village, where he was found selling the liquor

sachets kept in a hand bag. Subsequent thereto, the

police investigated the matter and filed charge sheet

- 5 -

against the present petitioners 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 Nos.2 and 3 from Keerti Bar,

Mugalkhod. No other material is forthcoming so as to

proceed against the petitioners.

8.

The investigation agency has not collected any

material to establish that the liquor packets are actually

purchased from petitioners’ shop or belongs to petitioners.

Under such circumstances, in the absence of nexus,

criminal action is impermissible.

9.

Learned counsel for the petitioners 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

- 6 -

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:

"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, the Magistrate

Proforma" should in which not even use the

"printed words "Cogn