Karnataka High Court
D V K Ravi vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
CRL.P No. 103889 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103889 OF 2022 (482-)
BETWEEN:
D.V.K. RAVI, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
AGE. 45 YEARS,
R/O. KPR AGRO CHEM LTD.,
S. NO.108 AND 109,
HALAVARTHI,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY THE FERTILIZER INSPECTOR AND
AGRICULTURE OFFICER
RAITHA SAMPARKA KENDRA
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.10.2021 IN C.C NO.
1877/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
SIRAGUPPA, AT BALLARI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S
7(1)(a)(ii) OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT AND QUASH THE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO. 2.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
CRL.P No. 103889 of 2022
ORDER
The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent.
2. A private complaint was filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. by the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act') alleging that the fertilizer manufactured by KPR Agro Chem Ltd., was of sub-standard quality. The learned Magistrate after perusal of the complaint, took cognizance of the aforesaid offence and issued summons. Taking exception to the same, the petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the complaint filed by the respondent without arraying the Company as an accused is not maintainable, since the petitioner-accused No.2 who is Managing Director of the Company cannot be held vicariously guilty of the aforesaid offence as specified under Section 10 of the Act.
4. On the other hand, the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner-accused No.2 -3- CRL.P No. 103889 of 2022 who is the Managing Director of the Company is responsible for maintaining the quality of the fertilizer manufactured by the Company and as such, the learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance of the aforesaid offence and the same does not warrant any interference.
5. I have examined the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Section 2(a) of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 specifies that "Act" means the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 specifies that if the person contravening an order made under Section 3 is a company, every person who, at the time the contravention was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Hence, to hold the officer of the Company vicariously guilty, the Company should be arrayed as an accused.
-4-CRL.P No. 103889 of 2022
7. In the instant case, the Company having not been arrayed as an accused, the petitioner cannot be held vicariously guilty of the aforesaid offences as specified under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in C.C. No.1877/2021 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Siraguppa, insofar it relates to the petitioner-accused No.2 is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57