MANJUNATH S/O. VENKATESH SANGOLLI ALIAS GOA MANJYA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104417 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
MANJUNATH
S/O. VENKATESH SANGOLLI
@ GOA MANJYA,
AGE. 35 YEARS,
OCC. AUTO DRIVER,
R/AT. RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR,
Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI B
S
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
DHARWAD-580004.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GOURISHANKAR S.MOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
E AND N CRIME POLICE STATION
HD CITY POLICE STATION,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
DHARWAD,
DIST. DHARWAD,
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
AT DHARWAD-580011.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)
----
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.3/ PETITIONER IN
E AND N CRIME POLICE STATION HD CITY CRIME NO.006/2020
IN SPL. NDPS. C.C. NO.15/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT DHARWAD
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 20(B)(II)(B) OF NDPS ACT
1985, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)
1. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3, is before this
Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in Crime
No.6/2020 of respondent – police, now in Special NDPS
C.C. No.15/2025 pending on the file of the Principal
District and Sessions Judge at Dharwad, for the offences
punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS
Act”).
Brief facts of the case:
2. The complainant has lodged a complaint stating that he
had received credible information on 03.09.2020 at about
08:30 a.m. stating that the accused Nos.1 and 2 were
transporting ganja near the underbridge of Karwar Road
between 01.00 p.m. and 02.00 p.m. Accordingly, he
gave a complaint. After giving the said complaint, he
secured the panchas and went to the spot and waited for
the arrival of those two persons. At that time, two
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
persons were coming on an Activa two-wheeler and they
were apprehended by the complainant and his team.
Though they tried to run away from the spot, the police
team chased them and apprehended them. On enquiry,
they disclosed that they brought the said Ganja from
accused No.3 - Manjunath and they were going to sell the
same to the customers. The respondent - Police
conducted search and seized the contraband and it was
weighed. The said contraband was weighing 1 kg. 750
grams. Out of the said Ganja, 50 grams was taken as a
sample and mahazar was drawn. The respondent - police
registered a case and arrested the accused. The case has
been split and a separate case has been registered
against the petitioner on 16.09.2025. Accused Nos.1 and
2 have been acquitted by the Trial Court in Special NDPS
C.C. No.8 of 2020. Therefore, the present petitioner is
seeking the relief on parity.
3. Heard Sri Gourishankar S Mot, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent – State.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Trial Court acquitted accused Nos.1 and 2 on the ground
that the Investigating Officer has not followed the
mandatory requirements, which is stated in Mohanlal v.
State of Punjab in Criminal Appeal No.1880/2011 by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that the Investigating Officer has to send the
seized Ganja leaves for chemical examination within 72
hours from the time of seizure. Having failed to send said
Ganja within 72 hours, the entire proceedings had to be
vitiated. Thus, the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified the
position of law in such a manner. In the present case
also, the Trial Court acquitted the accused Nos.1 and 2 on
the same ground. Hence, the accused No.3 is also
standing on the same footing. Therefore, parity may be
extended to the petitioner and acquit him from the case.
Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the
petitioner prays to allow the petition.
Per contra
5. , learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent - State vehemently submitted that the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
petitioner is standing on a different footing. He was the
seller of the contraband to accused Nos.1 and 2. The trial
has to be conducted against the petitioner since he had
sold the contraband. Parity cannot be applicable to the
petitioner and the petition may be dismissed. Making
such submissions, learned High Court Government
Pleader for the respondent - State prays to dismiss the
petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties and on perusal of the complaint and also the
findings of the Trial Court in acquitting accused Nos.1 and
2, the Trial Court has acquitted the accused Nos.1 and 2
on the technical ground that the seized contraband/ganja
had not been sent for chemical analysis within 72 hours
from the time of seizure. Thus, the said principle is
squarely applicable to the petitioner since he is also
standing on the same footing. Hence, I am of the
considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a
case to quash the proceedings.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18350
CRL.P No. 104417 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020212402025
7. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
ii) The entire proceedings in Crime No.6/2020 of
respondent – police, now in Special NDPS C.C.
No.15/2025 pending on the file of the Principal
District and Sessions Judge at Dharwad, for the
offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B)
of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, is hereby quashed.
iii) In view of disposal of the petition, pending I.A.,
does not survive for consideration and the same
is also disposed of.
Sd/-
(S.RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
SMM/Bss
CT: UMD