PRADEEP S/O PARVATAPPA ELIGER vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101521 OF 2023
[482(Cr.P.C)/528(BNSS)]
BETWEEN:
1.
PRADEEP
S/O PARVATAPPA ELIGER,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: VENDOR (CL-9 LICENSEE),
RESIDING OF: KONDWAD ONI,
KILLA, DHARWAD.
2. KAREEMSAB
S/O BUDNESAB HARLAPUR,
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, (CL-9 LICENSEE),
RESIDING OF: NEAR DYAMAVVA TEMPLE,
NAVALGUND, DHARWAD.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAJASHEKAR R. GUNJALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
LOKAYUKTA,
REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD-11,
THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
RANGE OFFICER.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, H.C.G.P.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE-SHEET IN
CRIMINAL CASE NO.1003 OF 2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST
CLASS, DHARWAD, IN CONNECTION WITH F.I.R. NO.36/2018-
19/1705IE/170505 DATED 16.03.2019 REGISTERED BY EXCISE
INSPECTOR, DHARWAD CIRCLE, DHARWAD, FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 14, 32 AND 38A OF
THE KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT, 1965 TO MEET THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FURTHER
ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Rajashekar R. Gunjalli, l earned counsel appearing
for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2, and Sri Praveena Y.
Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent-State.
2. This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
seeking to quash the entire proceedings in Criminal Case
No.1003 of 2019 in connection with FIR No. 36/2018-
19/1705IE/170505 pending on the file of the learned II
Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class II
Court, Dharwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 14,
32 and 38A of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case, in a nutshell, are
as follows:
de facto
The complainant received a credible information on
15.03.2019 at about 8:15 p.m. regarding the alleged storage of
excess liquor at Ashoka Bar and Restaurant, Garave Village,
Dharwad, during 2019 election period. Acting on the said
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
information, the complainant secured the assistance of his staff
and panch witnesses and proceeded to the said Bar and
Restaurant for inspection. Upon inspection of the stock register
and the liquor stock available in the premises, the complainant
allegedly found excess liquor of 6.510 litres. The complainant
seized the said liquor bottles and lodged a complaint, which led
to registration of an First Information Report. After
investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed the charge-
sheet.
4. Taking exception to filing of the charge-sheet, the
petitioners have filed this petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that
the Investigating Officer failed to comply with the mandatory
requirements of Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965,
inasmuch as no search warrant was obtained before conducting
the raid and seizing the liquor bottles. Hence, he submits that
the registration of First Information Report is not sustainable
under Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. He further
submits that the offences alleged are cognizable and that the
registration of First Information Report after conducting the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
investigation is impermissible as specified under Section 154 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Accordingly, learned
counsel for petitioner sought to quash the criminal proceedings.
Per contra
6. , the learned High Court Government Pleader
has contended that Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act,
1965, empowers the Excise Officer to search the premises
without obtaining a search warrant. He further submits that
Rule 2 of the Karnataka Excise (Entry, Inspection and
Investigation Authorisation) Rules, 1967, specifies that any
Authorised Officer may exercise the power of entry and
inspection, and search without warrant under Sections 51 and
54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. Hence, he submits that
the registration of First Information Report is in compliance of
Section 51 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. Hence, learned
HCGP prays to dismiss the petition.
7. A perusal of the record reveals that the Excise Officer
conducted raid on the shop and seized the liquor bottles
without prior registration of an First Information Report as
required under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, which is in direct violation of the mandate laid down
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
in Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. and Others reported in
(2014) 2 SCC 1 .
8. Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, specifies
that if an Officer-in-charge of a Police Station intends to search
a place, he has to secure a warrant and if he has reason to
believe that an offence under this Act is being committed and
that a search warrant cannot be obtained without affording the
offender an opportunity of escape or to conceal an evidence of
the offence, he may, after recording the grounds of his belief,
conduct a raid.
9. In the instant case, the Excise Officer, without a search
warrant or without recording the reasons for dispensing with
obtaining search warrant, has entered and conducted the
search of the shop premises , which is impermissible. Rule 2 of
the Karnataka Excise (Entry, Inspection and Investigation
Authorisation) Rules, 1967, cannot override the provision
contained in Section 54 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. The
registration of F.I.R. is in violation of Section 54 of the
Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, and is not sustainable in law.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
10. Further, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of
G. Puttaraju v. State of Karnataka and Another , in Writ
Petition No.20816 of 2023, decided on 31.01.2024, has
observed that without registering an First Information Report,
commencing investigation is in violation of the provisions of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this
Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner would not be
sustainable in law. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following
O R D E R
i. Criminal petition is allowed .
ii. The entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.1003 of 2019
pending on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge
and Judicial Magistrate First Class II Court, Dharwad, for
the offences punishable under Sections 14, 32 and 38A of
the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, insofar as the petitioners
are hereby quashed.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17186
CRL.P No. 101521 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020098632023
In view of the disposal of the petition, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand dismissed.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
KVK /CT-AN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13