Karnataka Dharwad Bench v. (BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Quashed
allowed at the FIR is quashed by the order dated 18th May
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Essential Commodities Act ss. 3, 6, 7
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In that light, the petitioners become entitled to the amount that the State has received from auctioning the goods of the petitioners. The amount so at the hands of the State shall be paid to the petitioners without broking any delay at any rate…
Judgment
JAGADISH S.V. S/O. VEERBHADRAPPA, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: DODDAMARIKAMBA TEMPLE, NEAR HORAKERE, TQ: JAGALUR, DIST: DAVANAGERE, PIN CODE: 577 528. AZARUDDIN SAB, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: C/O: DAWOOL SAB MEHABOOB, VILLAGE. NAGARAHALLI, TQ: MUNDARGI, DIST: GADAG, PIN CODE: 582 118. YARISWAMY S/O. MARIYAPPA, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: S.S.PATIL NAGAR, TQ: MUNDARGI, DIST: GADAG, PIN CODE: 582 118.
(BY SRI MANOJ N. BIKKANNAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT, VIJAYANAGAR – 591 222. FOOD INSPECTOR HARPANHALLI, TALUK OFFICE, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR – 591 222. POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, HARAPANAHALLI STATION, HARAPANAHALLI, PIN CODE: 583 131. VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench +0530 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3161 WP No. 100906 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2023 BEARING NO. AANASA/EC- PRAKARNA/09/2023-24 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT I.E., DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYANAGAR PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO PAY THE AMOUNT EQUIVALENT OF THE AUCTIONED GOODS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
The petitioners are before this Court calling in questions an order of the first respondent – the Deputy Commissioner, dated 27.11.2023, which declines the claim of the petitioners for the amount payable of the auctioned goods.
Heard learned counsel Shri Manoj N.Bikkannavar appearing for the petitioners and the learned AGA Shri Sharad V.Magadum appearing for the respondents.
Operative part
3. The fats in brief germane are as follows: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3161 WP No. 100906 of 2025 On 01.02.2023 a crime comes to be registered against the petitioners in Crime No.18 of 2023 for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The result was seizure of the vehicle and goods in the vehicle. The petitioners aggrieved by the initiation of proceedings for offences as afore quoted knocks at the doors of this Court in Criminal Petition No.101140 of 2023 and the said petition comes to be allowed at the FIR is quashed by the order dated 18th May
By the said time, they Deputy Commissioner had auctioned the goods on the score that it was a perishable commodity. Therefore, the petitioners in the light of the quashment of the crime against him becomes entitled for the auctioned amount in terms of law. The law would be sub-section (3) of Section 6 of the Essential Commodities Act and in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 6 of the Essential Commodities Act, a person against whom the criminal cases registered for offences - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3161 WP No. 100906 of 2025 punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Act gets acquitted of the offences is entitled to the amount received by the State auctioning the property of the petitioners, the property would be the seized goods of the petitioners. The proceedings against the petitioners has now stood quashed.
In that light, the petitioners become entitled to the amount that the State has received from auctioning the goods of the petitioners. The amount so at the hands of the State shall be paid to the petitioners without broking any delay at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 82
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: allowed at the FIR is quashed by the order dated 18th May
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Essential Commodities Act — ss. 3, 6, 7.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 18 May 2023. The bench was M NAGAPRASANNA, EQUITY ISSUE A WRIT MANDAMUS, EQUITY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.