Karnataka High Court
Mahipal Singh Rathi vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145
CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200089 OF 2024 (482)
BETWEEN:
MAHIPAL SINGH RATHI S/O. BHANWAR SINGH,
AGE. 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION MANAGING DIRECTOR JU,
AGRI SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,
EXPRESS TRADE TOWER-2, UTTARPRADESH,
SECTOR 132, NOIDA, RESIDENCE OF R-6/126,
RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD, UTTARPRADESH-201002.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. AVINASH A. UPLOANKAR AND
SRI. RAVI K. ANOOR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
ASSISTANT AGRICULTURE OFFICER CUM
FERTILIZER INSPECTOR RIATHA SAMPARKA KENDRA
Digitally signed SHORAPUR, REPRESENTED BY
by MANJANNA ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
E
KALABURAGI BENCH-560001.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...RESPONDENT
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. F. M. INAMDAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITON IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C,
PRAYING TO EXERCISE INHERENT POWERS U/S.EC.482 OF CR.P.C,
EXAMINE THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC
NO.4414/2023, (PCR NO.84/2023) FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER CLAUSE 8 AND 19 (C) (I) (V) (VI) OF FERTILIZER CONTROL
ORDER 1985 AND U/SEC. 3 & 7 (1) (A) (ii) OF ESSENTIAL
COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIOPAL CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC COURT SHORAPUR, AGAINST THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145
CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-Stae.
2. Petitioner-Accused No.2 has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.4414/2023 pending on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Shorapur, Yadgir District, for the offences punishable under clause (8) and clause (19)(c) (i) (v) (vi) of Fertilizer Control Order 1985 and under Sections 3 & 7(1)(Aa(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
3. The factual matrix of the complaint's case is that, on 24.11.2022 on 4.30 p.m., the complainant visited the shop of accused No.1 and found stock of Kranti (contents Organic Zinc 12%) which is neither a fertilizer as per Schedule-I Part-A or Schedule-IV Part-A of Fertilizer (Inorganic, Organic or Mixed) Control Order 1985. Hence, the complainant seized the stock and reported the same to the Deputy Commissioner, Yadgir District, as per Section 6A -3- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145 CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024 of the E.C.Act. After seizer of the stock on 25.11.2022, the complainant sent the sample for analysis to the Deputy Director of Agriculture Fertilizer, Control Laboratory, Shivaji Nagara, Belagavi. As per the laboratory reports given by the Deputy Director of Agriculture, the Kranti samples contains only 9.12 Zinc as against label claim of 12% Zinc. Hence, the complainant issued show-cause notice to accused Nos.1 & 2. Accused No.1 gave his reply to the show cause notice. On 14.08.2023, the complainant without accepting the reply given to the show-cause notice filed the instant complaint.
4. As per the complaint, petitioner-accused No.2 and other two persons committed an offence by selling sub- standard fertilizer, which is in violation of the aforesaid rules.
5. The Trial Court after receipt of the complaint took cognizance of the offences lodged against accused Nos.1 to
3. Taking exception to the same, accused No.2-Managing Director of Fertilizer Company has filed this petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed the -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145 CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024 alleged offences. It is further contended that, petitioner is the Managing Director of the company and he is nowhere connected to the alleged crime. The samples were collected from sealed bags and hence, absolutely there are no specific allegations against the petitioner regarding his culpability of adulteration or substandard fertilizer contained in the stitched bags. Hence, he prayed to allow the petition.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that there are prima facie materials to show that the petitioner has committed the alleged offences. Hence, he prayed to reject the petition.
8. Perused the material available on record and considered the rival submission of both the sides.
9. On perusal of the record, it reveals that on 24.11.2022, the complaint visited the shop of accused No.1, took sample of fertilizer and sent the same to the Laboratory and referred those samples for analysis and he came to know that the seized samples were not up to the specifications and it was sub-standard. Hence, the -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145 CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024 complainant lodged the complaint against accused No.1- dealer of the Fertilizer Company, accused No.2-present petitioner who is responsible person for manufacturing Kranti (Organic Zinc 12%) and accused No.3 is the company responsible for manufacturing Kranti fertilizers.
10. On perusal of the entire complaint, there is no specific allegation laid against the petitioner as to how he is responsible for the adulteration of the fertilizers or how he is responsible for the substandard fertilizers contained in the stitched bags. In the case of SANJAY GOWDA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA in Criminal Petition No.7408 of 2015 dated 4-8- 2016, a Co-ordinate bench of this Court held that, 'as per the Government order issued by the Department of Agriculture, which requires the appointment of an officer for compliance of Fertilizer (Control) Order in every company manufacturing fertilizers and when such an officer is named, it is only against such officer that any violation in law under such provisions could be carried forward and not against any other officer of the company or its Managing Director.' -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145 CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024
11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Company has passed resolution, fixing responsibility on Compliance Officer of the Company viz., Sri Suresh Shirol, Regional Manager in accused No.3 - Company.
12. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and decision cited supra, the petitioner, who is the Managing Director of the Fertilizer Company, is not responsible for the quality of fertilizers seized and thus, the proceedings now initiated against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of process of law. For the foregoing reasons, the petition deserves to be allowed.
13. Further, it has come to the notice of this court that the Agriculture Officer or the department or the office who is in-charge of the concerned department or the officer of the Fertilizer Inspector either purposefully or due to inadvertence are not making the company as a party in a matter of this nature, which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. The case against accused No.1 is already quashed in Crl.P.No.201494/2023 dated 13.10.2023. Hence, continuation of case against accused No.2 will be abuse of -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5145 CRL.P No. 200089 of 2024 process of law. Hence, continuation of case against accused No.2 will be abuse of process of law. Accordingly I pass the following:
ORDER i. The criminal petition is allowed.
ii. The proceedings in C.C.No.4414/2023 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Shorapur, Yadgir District, insofar as, petitioner- accused No.2, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE EM/ct-an List No.: 19 Sl No.: 6