Delhi District Court
Ram Swroop vs . Food Safety on 9 January, 2023
IN THE COURT OF SH. HARJYOT SINGH BHALLA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-04
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF:
RAM SWROOP VS. FOOD SAFETY
COMMISSONER FOR DELHI & DIRECTOR (PFA)
CA No. 89/2019
CNR No. DLND01-006583-2019
Sh. Ram Swroop
Manager, Distribution
Delhi Milk Scheme,
Shadi Pur, West Patel Nagar,
New Delhi-110008 ......Appellant
Versus
Food Safety Commissioner for Delhi
& Director (PFA)
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
8th Floor, Mayur Bhawan,
Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 ......Respondent
Date of Institution: 10.04.2019
Date of decision : 09.01.2023
CA No. 89/2019
Ram Swroop Vs. The State 1/4
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Vide this judgment, I propose to dispose off the appeal filed against the order of conviction dated 09.01.2019 and order on sentence dated 14.01.2019 passed by Ld. ACMM-I, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
2. TCR perused. Arguments have been heard.
3. Briefly stated, in the present case, a complaint was made against the Delhi Milk Scheme for processing and selling adulterated milk. Alongwith the Delhi Milk Scheme, 5 nominees, namely, Sh. B.B. Garg, Sh. Ashok Bansal, Sh. Ram Swroop, Sh. J.S. Rathore and Sh. Vinay Bagga were also impleaded as accused, being nominee and responsible for day to day conduct and business of Delhi Milk Scheme.
4. The appellant before me i.e. Sh. Ram Swroop has challenged the order in appeal claiming that his nomination document was not considered by the Trial Court, as it was a limited nomination, unlike the other 4 co-accused persons, inasmuch as, his nomination was only for the purposes of distribution. He further contends that in the present case, the sample was lifted from the factory premises and before it left the factory for the purposes of distribution.
5. In these circumstances, once the sample was still in the factory premises and before the process of distribution had begun, he could not have been held liable as a nominee on behalf of the company for any defect in manufacture of a product before its distribution. He, therefore, submits that his case was not the CA No. 89/2019 Ram Swroop Vs. The State 2/4 same as that of the other co-accused persons and the judgment of the Trial Court, nowhere deals with this aspect of the matter.
6. I have noticed that the judgment of the Trial Court in para 4 of the judgment proceeds with the basis that all 5 accused persons were nominees/In-charge, responsible for day to day conduct and business of Delhi Milk Scheme. The same conclusion is arrived at in para 31 of the judgment, without considering the language of the nomination form, as also, the claim made by the accused in the statement under Section 313 of Cr.PC. In his statement under Section 313 of Cr.PC, the accused claimed that he was only responsible for distribution and this is also recorded in para 12 of the judgment. Once the defence of the accused was noted in para 12 of the judgment and the nomination document was document admitted document by the Department as well, the contents of the same were required to be considered and the submission of the accused was required to be dealt with in the judgment.
7. I find that no reasoning has been given by the Trial Court as to why the defence raised by the accused was not relevant or that it had no effect whatsoever, and the same is a material irregularity in the judgment.
8. Therefore, the order of conviction and order of sentence qua the accused Ram Swroop is hereby set aside. Matter remanded back to the Trial Court to proceed with the issue afresh, giving reasoning on the same i.e. whether the nomination form of the accused, only for the purposes of distribution, would still make him liable for prosecution and conviction for any CA No. 89/2019 Ram Swroop Vs. The State 3/4 defect in the product, even at the stage of packaging, before it left the factory premises.
9. TCR be sent back with direction to the accused/appellant to appear before the Ld. CMM, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi for 30.01.2023.
10. Appeal file be consigned to Record Room.
Dictated in the open court (Harjyot Singh Bhalla) on 09.01.2023 ASJ-04, New Delhi CA No. 89/2019 Ram Swroop Vs. The State 4/4