M/S Brakes India Ltd., vs The Inspector Of Legal Metrology on 22 February, 2016

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Brakes India Ltd., vs The Inspector Of Legal Metrology on 22 February, 2016

Bench: S.N. Satyanarayana

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                    DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA

                 Crl.P.No.100250/2015

BETWEEN:

1.   M/S BRAKES INDIA LIMITED,
     A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
     COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
     HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
     PADI, CHENNAI-600 050,
     REP.BY BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
     S.KESAVAN S/O SEENAPAIA RAO,
     AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS.

2.   M/S MADRAS AUTO SERVICE
     HAVING ITS OFFICE AT,
     NO.65/3, HOSUR MAIN ROAD,
     7TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN,
     BANGALORE-560 027,
     REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER/
     AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
     M.N.RAVI KUMAR S/O D.R.NANJE DEVARU,
     AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

3.   M/S MANICKBAG AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,
     A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
     COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
     HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
     N.H.17, BELEGULI CROSS, ANKOLA-581 314,
     REP.BY ITS MANAGER,
     BHARAT APPAYA NAIK S/O APPAYYA JETTI NAYAK,
     AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.

4.   M/S MANICKBAG AUTOMOBILES
     A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
                                2




       COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
       HAVING ITS OFFICE AT,
       P.B.ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI-580 031,
       REP.BY ITS MANAGER PARTS,
       KISHOR KRISHNA KURTAKOTI,
       S/O KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
                                              .. PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.HARISH V.S., ADV.)

AND:

THE INSPECTOR OF LEGAL METROLOGY,
KARWAR SUB DIVISION, KARWAR,
MAHASATHI KALYAN MANTAPA BUILDING,
KAJUBAG, KARWAR-581 304.
                                              ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)

      THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING
BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE (JD) AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
FIRST CLASS, ANKOLA IN C.C.NO.300/2014 FOR THE OFFENCE
UNDER SECTION 36(I) OF LEGAL METROLOGY ACT, 2009.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

Accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.300/2014 on the file of the JMFC, Ankola have come up in this petition seeking quashing of the aforesaid proceedings which are initiated with reference to offence punishable under Section 36(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and also under Rules 3 6(1) and 6(2) of Legal Metrology (Package Commodities) Rules, 2011.

2. It is the case of the accused that the complaint which is filed in crime No.14/2013-14 is erroneous inasmuch as the person who filed the complaint did not file the same along with letter of authorization, and further an attempt is made to arraign the officers of accused company by name, which is not permissible under Rule 6(1), 6(2) of the Legal Metrology (Package Commodities) Rules, 2011. He would also try to substantiate that the said legal position is covered by the judgments.

3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners, perused the grounds urged for quashing. On going through the same, this Court is of the opinion that before approaching this Court seeking quashing, petitioners herein should exhaust their remedy seeking their discharge of the aforesaid offence by relying upon the said judgments by making necessary application before the learned Magistrate. In the event of said application not 4 being considered, only then they can think of coming before this Court seeking quashing of the same. In that view of the matter, this Court feel that the present petition is premature in nature, cannot be entertained at this stage. Hence, the petition is rejected reserving liberty to them to approach the learned Magistrate for appropriate relief as provided under Code of Criminal Procedure.

Sd/-

JUDGE MBS/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court