Allowed

The Divisional Chief Executive v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Mar 2018Crl.MC/1874/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Kerala quashed proceedings against a Divisional Chief Executive of ITC Ltd. The court held that only a named person can be proceeded against criminally and the company must be made an accused under the Tobacco Control Act.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in the trial court against the petitioner are quashed.

The Divisional Chief Executive Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1874 of 2018

¶6

ST. NO.8488/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, THRISSUR.

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED

¶8

THE DIVISIONAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE, TOBACCO DIVISION, M/S. ITC LTD., J.L. NEHRU ROAD, KOLKATHA - 700 071.

¶9

BY SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE.

¶10

ADVS. SRI.V.B.UNNIRAJ,

¶11

SMT.R.S.GEETHA, SMT.K.SEEMA, SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL, SMT.P.ANITHA.

¶12

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶14

2. HEALTH INSPECTOR,

¶15

COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE, ALAPPAD, THRISSUR - 680 687.

¶16

BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S. HRITHWIK.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

rs.

¶19

22/03/2018.

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 1874 of 2018 ()

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶23

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED OF THE COMPLAINT IN S.T NO. 8488/2016 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR - 1.

¶24

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 13.06.2016 PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs. 22/03/2018.

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.

¶30

Crl.M.C. No.1874 OF 2018

¶31

Dated this the 20^th day of March, 2018

¶32

ORDER

¶33

Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶34

Petitioner is the 2^nd accused in S.T.No.8488 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur. The accused is alleged to have committed the offence under Section 20 of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement

¶35

and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act. The proceedings are sought to be quashed on the ground that the petitioner is not shown as an accused by his name but in his official capacity. It is also submitted that the company is not made an accused.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶37

The petitioner is Divisional Chief Executive of Tobacco Division of ITC Ltd. Today's Divisional Chief Executive may not be tomorrow's Divisional Chief Executive, and so on. Only a named person

¶38

can be proceeded against in a criminal case. The proceedings in the trial court are liable to be quashed on this ground alone. Under Section

¶39

Crl.M.C. Nos.1874 OF 2018 2

¶40

26 of the Act, the company as well as every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against him and punished accordingly. There is no reason that the company is not made an accused. In Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours (P) Ltd (2012 (5) Supreme Court Cases 661) , the Supreme Court has held that unless the company is made an accused, there cannot be a valid prosecution. On this ground also, the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed.

¶41

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in the trial court against the petitioner are quashed.

¶42

Sd/- K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶43

The Divisional Chief Executive v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Chief Executive v. State of Kerala

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

Onuoha Celestine Chima Vs the State of Kerala

Hassan Kutty @ Hassan Haji Vs State of Kerala

Anandu Vs the State of Kerala

John K. Oomman Vs State of Kerala

John K. Oomman Vs State of Kerala

Joseline K.Jose Vs State of Kerala