KAIRALI EANTERPRISE Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY virtue of an order dated 12/3/2010, the matter is referred to Division Bench for decision. In the present case, whether the action of the authorities of the respondent-State following the provisions of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution Control) Order, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as `1992 order' for short) is repugnant and therefore contravenes the provisions of Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as `2001 Order' for short) of the Central Government has to be seen.

(2.) THE brief facts that lead to referring the matters to the Division Bench by the learned Single Judge are as under: On 15.10.2009 at about 10 a.m. near Metikurke forest on N.H-4 within the jurisdiction of Chitradurga district, the Police of Hiriyur seized 350 bags of rice alongwith two lorries bearing Registration Nos.KA-12-A-0479 and KL-13-R-994. FIR came to be lodged by the concerned Circle Inspector of Police, Hiriyur and accordingly Crime No.435/2009 came to be registered for the offences punishable under sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (`Act' for short) and so also Section-420 of IPC. Subsequent to the seizure, the authorities concerned followed up the matter by appropriate procedure contemplated under the Act. THE petitioners-owners filed an application for release of the lorries before the Deputy Commissioner on 11.11.2009. In application, the petitioners had also sought for release of 350 bags of rice. After investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed and the matter is pending in C.C. No.756/2009 for trial of offences punishable under sections 3 and 7 of the Act and also section-420 of IPC. After filing of the charge sheet, the validity of the charge sheet also came to be questioned in Criminal Petition No.6311/2009 under section-482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the matter came to be admitted on 9/12/2009.

(3.) THE learned Judge after referring to several decisions of the Apex Court, this High Court and various other High Courts was of the opinion that the action taken by the officials concerned under 1992 Order was not at all repugnant to the procedure contemplated under 2001 Order and moreover the offence punishable under section-420 of IPC being a cognizable offence, it was open for the Police to search, seize and investigate into the said crime. THE learned Judge opining that 1992 Order not being in contravention of 2001 Order and the fact that offence under Section-420 of IPC was involved in the case, differed from the opinion of another learned Judge in Crl.P.No.4481/2003 c/w Crl.P.1191/2004 disposed of on 22.7.2004 and proceeded to say that he would disagree and differ with the reasons assigned by the learned Single Judge in the above criminal petitions and referred the matter to Division Bench for consideration.