Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors vs State & Anr on 9 May, 2012
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.530/2012
Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR.
:::
JUDGMENT
:::
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.530/2012
Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors. vs. State of Raj. & Anr.
Date of Judgment :: 9 May, 2012.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Mr.AK Rajvanshy ) for the petitioners.
Mr.PK Sharma )
Mr.MA Bhurat, PP, for the respondent State.
...
BY THE COURT :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners who are the Senior Marketing Manager, Managing Director and Directors respectively of the company named M/s. Northern Minerals Ltd. (for short 'company'), challenging the order dated 9.3.2006 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana, Nagaur taking cognizance against them for the offences under Sections 6, 7 and 19 of the Seeds Act, 1966 and Sections 7(1)(a) & 13(1)(c) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Succinctly stated the facts necessary for the disposal SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.530/2012 Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 2 of the instant misc. petition are that the Seed Inspector cum Assistant Director (Agriculture), Nagaur took a sample of Mustard seeds manufactured by the company from Toshina Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti Limited, Tehsil Deedwana on 22.10.2005. The samples on being examined by the Rajasthan State Seed Testing Laboratory, Durgapura were found not to be conforming to the standards. Thereupon, a complaint has been filed in the Court of A.C.J.M., Deedwana against the Vyasthapak of Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti, Toshina, owner/proprietor of Balaji Khad Beej Bhandar, Kuchaman and the present petitioners. The learned Magistrate proceeded to take cognizance on the complaint and summoned the petitioners as well as other co-accused persons by order dated 9.3.2006. The said order summoning the petitioner as well as the proceedings of the complaint has been challenged by way of the instant misc. petition. It has also been prayed that the proceedings of the complaint as such deserves to be quashed in its entirety.
The proceedings have been assailed on various grounds. Since the petition is being decided on the solitary ground i.e. the non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Seeds Act and Rules regarding the mode of sampling, the other grounds of challenge raised in the petition are not being considered.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.530/2012 Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 3 mandatory procedure prescribed for sampling of the seeds has not been followed in this case and, therefore, the proceedings of the complaint are liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the complaint filed in this case by the Seed Inspector cum Agriculture Officer. It is submitted that as per the admitted fact mentioned in the complaint, the samples of the seeds were simply packed in the cloth bags and sent to the laboratory for analysis. He, therefore, contends that the mandatory procedure prescribed in the Seeds Act and Rules was not followed. Placing reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Gauri Shanker & Ors. vs. State reported in 2011(2) Cr.L.R.(Raj.) 1685, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings are liable to be quashed as the mandatory procedure of sampling has not been adhered to.
Learned PP is not in a position to dispute the fact that the procedure of taking samples of the seed as prescribed under the Act has not been followed in this case.
The relevant portion of the complaint filed in this case is quoted as below :-
"प वध न क अनस र सरस ब ज ककस ध नक ब ल ल ट न० ए आर/ र/05-20-05 स त न न न ललए तथ पपत 5 थ&ल पर लग ट& ग क( सरन ए अककत कर ब ज एव पपत 5 क कपड क( थ&ल* लकर स लबन, क( गय ।"
On consideration of the arguments advanced at bar SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.530/2012 Ramesh Chand Kalra & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 4 and upon going through the complaint filed in this case, it is evident that the Seed Inspector at the time of taking samples has not followed the mandatory procedure i.e. the manner in which the samples of Seed have to be taken. this Court whilst dealing with an identical issue in the case of Gauri Shanker (supra), has held that the non-compliance of the mandatory procedure laid down in the Seeds Act & Rules regarding the manner in which the seed samples are to be taken, vitiates the proceedings upon the complaint filed for the violation of the Seeds Act.
The upshot of the above discussion is that this Court has no hesitation in holding that the order summoning the petitioner as accused person as well as the proceedings of the entire complaint are vitiated because the mandatory provisions prescribed in the Seeds Act and Rules for the sampling and packing of the samples have not followed by the seizure officer.
Resultantly, the present misc. petition succeeds and complaint case no.38/2006 and all subsequent proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed in its entirety.
Stay petition also stands disposed of.
(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.
S.Phophaliya