ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in FIR No.65/2022-2023/4206IE/420606 registered by the respondent No.2-The Karnataka Excise Department, Division-41 (Adugodi), Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 11, 14, 14(2), 32, 38(A) and 43 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 ( for short 'K.E. Act').

2. Heard the arguments of learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of respondent No.2, a suo motu case has been registered against the petitioner and it is alleged that at Hosur Main Road near Christian Cemetry, a temporary check post was established on the eve of the upcoming State election. On 14.04.2023, a vehicle was intercepted by the temporary check post, they found there were 68 liquor bottles worth of Rs.16,89,040/- kept in the Toyota Innova Crysta Car belongs to the wife of this petitioner where the petitioner said to be a driver. An intimation was given to the Excise Department. Immediately, the Excise Officer visited the spot and seized the liquor bottles along with the vehicle, prepared FIR and sent to the Court which is under challenge.

4. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner seriously objected the same and contended that the respondent No.2 has not followed the procedure under Sections 53 and 54 of K.E. Act. They have to obtain the warrant under Section 53 of the K.E. Act. If not, they have to record the reason under Section 54 of the said Act and search should be conducted. But there is a gross violation of the search and seizure made by the respondent No.2. Hence, prayed for quashing the FIR.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submits the record of reasons was reduced into writing as per Section 54 of the K.E. Act, therefore, there is no flaw in the investigation.

6. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the records, the vehicle in question was seized by the respondent No.2 on the information given by the temporary check post erected near the Hosur Main Road, Christian cemetery, Adugodi and there were 68 bottles of liquors seized by the respondent No.2 in presence of the panchas. The main contention of the learned Senior counsel is that they are the violating the Sections 53 and 54 of the K.E. Act. But on perusal of the search warrant alleged to have been prepared by the respondent No.2 at 3.45 a.m., where he has stated that he was unable to obtain warrant from the Magistrate under Section 53 K.E. Act, therefore, recorded the reason for not obtaining the warrant in order to show that he has complied the provisions of Section 54 of K.E. Act. But on perusal of the panchanama prepared by the respondent No.2, which was prepared between 4.15 a.m. and 5.30 a.m., where there is no reference available in the panchanama for not obtaining any warrant under Section 53 of K.E. Act or preparing the record of reason under Section 54 of K.E. Act. It appears, the search warrant alleged to have been prepared by the Investigating Officer only after preparing the panchanama and registering the FIR after coming to the Office. Even the record of reason was not accompanied with the FIR where the FIR was sent to the Magistrate which reveals the record of reason under Section 54 of K.E. Act has been prepared by the Investigating Officer only subsequent to preparing the FIR in order to show that he has complied the provision of Section 54 K.E. Act.

7. This Court in the catena of decisions has held, even though there is a preparation of this record of reason under Section 54 of K.E. Act, if it is not sent along with the FIR, it amounts to the violation and it is nothing but after thought. The same was prepared only to show that it was prepared by the Investigating Officer in order to show that he has complied the provisions of Section