Allowed

Shri Ganeshappa K.S. v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2023CRL.P/101542/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings for selling substandard fertilizer. The court held the proceedings were not maintainable as the manufacturing company was not named as a co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Complaint in CC No.903/2022 and all consequential proceedings against the petitioner are quashed.

Shri Ganeshappa K.S. Vs the State of Karnataka — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101542 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI. GANESHAPPA K.S., FERTILIZER HEAD, AGE. 48 YEARS, ZUARI AGRO CHEMICALS LTD., ADVENTZ CENTRE, 1^ST FLOOR, NO.28 UNION STREET, OFFICE CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. (BY SRI. M.J. PEERJADE, ADVOCATE)

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMIM KANKUPPI VIJAYALAKSHMIM KANKUPPI Date: 2023.11.23 16:48:22 +0530

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH FERTILIZER INSPECTOR CUM AGRICULTURE OFFICER, LOKAPUR O/O. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE MUDHOL, R/BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD. … RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO THAT THE COMPLAINT AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.903/2022 FILED AND PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF ADDL. C.J. AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS MUDHOL AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 UNDER CLAUSE OF THE 19 OF THE FERTILIZER CONTROL ORDER 1985 R/W SEC. 3 AND 7 OF THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955 BE QUASHED.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner/accused No.2-Sri. Ganeshappa K.S., who is the Fertilizer Head of Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited, has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Cr.P.C.’, for short) for quashing the complaint and all other proceedings in CC No.903/2022 pending on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol, for the offences under Clause 19 of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘EC Act’, for short).

¶20

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State.

¶21

As per the averments made in the complaint dated 21.08.2020, a sample of the fertilizer was drawn by the Agricultural Officer, Lokapur, from the premises of the Proprietor of Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited, Jai Kisan

¶22

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶23

¶24

Junction, Lokapur. Upon analysis of the same by the Testing Laboratory, the fertilizer was found to be of substandard. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner/accused No.2 and accused No.1. Accused No.1 requested for the owner’s sample to be sent for reanalysis to the Commissioner of Agriculture, Sheshadri Road, Bangalore. The complainant receives the test report on 17.09.2019 from the Analyst, Fertilizer Control laboratory, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, wherein the owner’s sample of fertilizer has also failed in re-analysis test and found to be a sub-standard one. The copy of the said reanalysis report was issued to accused No.1 along with a notice and also to the petitioner.

¶25

Ultimately, the complainant namely Agricultural

¶26

Officer, Lokapur, Office of the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Mudhol, filed a complaint on 21.08.2020 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mudhol, against the Proprietor of Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited, Lokapur, as well

¶27

¶28

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶29

as the petitioner-Sri. Ganeshappa K.S.-the Fertilizer Head of Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited.

¶30

The main ground upon which the complaint and proceedings have been sought to be quashed, is that, while filing the complaint, the manufacturing company namely Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited Company was not arrayed as a co-accused. On that basis, it is submitted that the complaint under Sections 3 and 7 of the EC Act and clause 19 of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, itself, was not maintainable.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the absence of arraying the manufacturing company as a co-accused, the complaint filed against the petitionerSri. Ganeshappa K.S., Ferlizer Head of the company was not maintainable and to support the aforesaid submission, he has placed reliance upon the following decisions:

¶32

i) State of Madras v. C.V. Parekh¹

¶33

ii) Diwan Chand v. State of Punjab and another²

¶34

1 1970 (3) SCC 491

¶35

2 2006 SCC Online P&H 359

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶38

iii) Yogpal Malik v. State of Haryana³

¶39

iv) Decision of this Court in Criminal Petition No.100263/2019 disposed of on 01.10.2021

¶40

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,

¶41

I find the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner has merit and the petition deserves to succeed.

¶42

I have perused the complaint and found that the company Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited was not arrayed as a co-accused and therefore, in the absence of arraying the aforesaid company as a co-accused, the complaint could not have been filed against the petitioner Sri. Ganeshappa K.S., the Fertilizer Head of the company. My view finds full support of the judgments in the cases of State of Madras,

¶43

Diwan Chand, Yogpal Malik and in Criminal Petition No.100263/2019 (supra).

¶44

In the result, the present petition is allowed and all consequential proceedings against the petitioner are hereby quashed.

¶45

3 200 EFT 150

¶46

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13568 CRL.P No. 101542 of 2023

¶47

¶48

It is made clear that quashing of the complaint against the present petitioner/Sri. Ganeshappa K.S. shall have no bearing in effective continuance of the proceedings initiated against the remaining accused.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

Kmv ct:bck

Shri Ganeshappa K.S. v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Ganeshappa K.S. v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar S/O Dasharath Madar Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagaraj S/O Shekappa Mattihalli @ Guddadahalli Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. S Geetha Vs State of Karnataka

Ramesh S/O Basappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Veeramaheshwara Pattina Souhardha Vs Sri.Karithi Kumar M.

Sri. Sayed Nijamuddin Hussain Vs the State of Karnataka