MD ARIF vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201118 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
M.D. ARIF S/O MOSINSAB JAMADAR,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O WADDANKERA TQ. HUMNABAD,
DIST. BIDAR.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. AMEERAHAMAJA A. GUNNAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH,
HUMNABAD POLICE STATION, BIDAR DIST.,
REPRESENTED BY
THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585 102.
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. BINDUKUMARI
FOOD INSPECTOR, TAHASIL OFFICE,
HUMNABAD, DIST. BIDAR-585 328.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE PRESENT CRIMINAL
PETITION AND ALSO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING IN
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
C.C.NO.1075/2025 ARISING IN CRIME NO.28/2024
REGISTERED AT HUMNABAD POLICE STATION, BIDAR.
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES
ACT, 1955 U/SEC.3 AND 7(1)(A)(II), AGAINST PETITIONERS MD
ARIF ACCUSED NO.2, WHICH IS TRAILED AT PRL. CIVIL JUDGE
(JD) AND JMFC AT HUMNABAD, DIST. BIDAR, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.
learned High Court Government Pleader (for short
‘HCGP’) is present and now he takes notice on behalf of
the respondent No.2 also.
2. Even though this petition is posted for
admission, with the consent of both the parties, the
matter is taken up for final disposal.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned HCGP for the respondents on the petition.
Perused the relevant materials on record.
4. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused No.2 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for an order to quash
the entire proceedings in the case in CC No.1075/2025
pending before the learned Principal Civil Judge and
JMFC, Humnabad, Bidar District arising out of Crime
No.28/2024 of the respondent No.1 Police for the
offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of Essential
Commodities Act (for short ‘EC Act’) in respect of the
petitioner/ accused No.2.
5. The case alleged against the petitioner and
other accused persons is that on 02.02.2024 at about
12.00 noon, when the respondent No.2 was in her office,
she received credible information that the rice belonging
to Public Distribution System (PDS) was illegally stored
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
in the house of one Nayum S/o Gafursab Saudhaghar/
accused No.1 situated behind APMC Market Yard,
Murad colony, Humnabad. Accordingly, the respondent
No.2 along with the police and panchas went to the
house of the accused No.1 and conducted raid. The
accused No.1 was present in the house, wherein ten
plastic bags of rice of 50 kgs., each belonging to PDS
were found.
6. On enquiry, the accused No.1 told that the
said rice was collected from the public for giving the
same to the petitioner/ accused No.2 and the accused
No.3. Hence, the case was registered against the
petitioner and other accused persons. After completion
of the investigation, the respondent No.1 police filed the
charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section
7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act and Section 18 of Karnataka
Essential Commodities Public Distribution System
(Control) Order, 2016 (for short ‘PDS (Control) Order’).
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
Hence, the petitioner along with other accused persons
have committed the alleged offence.
7. The learned HCGP has orally objected to the
petition submitting that there is prima facie case against
the petitioner for the alleged offences. No ground is
made out by the petitioner to quash the proceedings
and therefore, he has sought for dismissal of the
petition.
8. The contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that only on the basis of the statement of
accused No.1, the petitioner is made as accused in the
case. There is no material collected by the respondent
No.1 Police during the investigation to show that the
seized rice belongs to the petitioner.
9. Moreover, one of the grounds urged by the
petitioner is that the respondent No.1 Police along with
respondent No.2 conducted search and seized the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
alleged rice without following the procedure
contemplated under Section 19(2)(a) of PDS (Control)
Order.
10. The copy of the charge sheet along with
connected papers are produced by the petitioner. On
perusal of those materials, it would be clear that except
the statement of the accused No.1, there is no material
forthcoming from the respondent No.1 Police to show
that the petitioner is in any way concerned with the
seized rice. There is also no material forthcoming from
the respondent Police to show that the seized rice
belongs to the PDS. There is no material forthcoming
from the prosecution to show that the respondents
followed the procedure under Section 19(2)(a) of PDS
(Control) Order while raiding the spot and seizing the
alleged rice.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
drawn the attention of this Court to the following orders
of Coordinate Bench of this Court:
(i) The order dated 04.09.2024 in
Crl.P.No.200504/2024 (Abdul Nizam Vs. The
Sate of Karnataka and Another).
The order dated 11.06.2025 in
(ii)
Crl.P.No.200695/2025 C/w Crl.P. No.
200694/2025 (Madhukar Vs. The Sate
through Police Hallikhed P.S.).
(iii) The order dated 11.06.2025 in
Crl.P.No.200737/2025 (Sharanu Belur @
Sharanabasappa Vs. The State through
Kamalapur Police Station).
(iv) The order dated 09.09.2026 in
Crl.P.No.200006/2026 (Machendra and
another Vs. The State of Karnataka and
another).
(v) The order dated 29.08.2026 in
Crl.P.No.200457/2026 (Yogesh Vs. The State
of Karnataka and another).
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
12. The said orders are squarely applicable to the
case on hand. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has
held in those orders that only on the basis of statement
of the co-accused, no case can be proceeded against the
concerned accused. Moreover, when the respondent
police have not followed the procedure as per Section
19(2)(a) of PDS (Control) Order, seizure itself does not
stand for consideration. Hence, the proceedings of the
case against the petitioner is abuse of process of Court.
The same should be set aside as sought for in the
petition. Hence, the petitioner has made out sufficient
grounds to allow the petition and consequently, the
petition deserves to be allowed.
13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(a) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(b) The entire proceedings in the case in
CC No.1075/2025 pending before the
learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC,
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11668
CRL.P No. 201118 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087262026
Humnabad, Dist. Bidar arising out of
Crime No.28/2024 of the respondent
No.1 Police for the offences punishable
under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act and 18
of PDS (Control) Order are quashed in
respect of petitioner/ accused No.2 is
concerned.
In view of disposal of the main petition, interim
application, if any, does not survive for consideration
and accordingly, stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
RSP
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48
CT: SB