Quashed

Suresh Sah @ Suresh Lal Sah and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Jul 2017CR. MISC./9217/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing petition, the Patna High Court set aside a charge under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1957 framed against shopkeepers for selling sealed misbranded oil. The Court held that liability for misbranding sealed products lies with the manufacturer, not the shopkeeper.

What did the court decide?

The charge framed against the petitioners by the S.D.J.M., Katihar and the subsequent criminal proceeding against them is set aside.

Suresh Sah @ Suresh Lal Sah and Anr. Vs the… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9217 of 2012

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -0 Year- null Thana -null District- KATIHAR

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Suresh Sah @ Suresh Lal Sah S/O Late Mohan Lal Sah

¶6

Rajiv Kumar Sah @ Raju Kumar S/O Suresh Lal Sah

¶7

Both resident of Mohalla- Bara Bazar (Katihar), P.S., P.O. & District- Katihar

¶8

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State Of Bihar

¶11

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶12

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶13

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

¶14

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶15

Date: 03-07-2017

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

In the present quashing application, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 24.02.2009 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Katihar framing charge against them under Sections 16(1) and 16(a)(i) under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1957 in Criminal Proceeding B-III Case No. 5 of 2001.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that only allegation against the petitioners is that they were engaged in selling sealed misbranded mustered oil under the label and wrapper of New Kishan Mustard Oil. He further submits that sample of seized mustered oil was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis and the report indicates no adulteration was found in the oil. Moreover in

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9217 of 2012 dt.03-07-2017

¶20

2/2

¶21

case of misbranding, the liability is not of the seller rather it is of the manufacturer. He further submits that on the same day, another prosecution case was launched against the petitioners with regard to seizure of misbranded pouch of Gutaka bearing Criminal Proceeding of B-III Case No. 03 of 2001 but the charge framed in the aforesaid case too was also set aside by a co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 08.08.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1403 of 2012 holding therein that in case of misbranding the criminal liability is on the manufacturer and not on the shopkeeper.

¶22

Being the admitted position that the petitioners were shopkeepers and not manufacturers and in case of misbranding of a sealed product and being sold in the same state, as purchased by a shopkeeper, the responsibility lies with the manufacturer and not of the vendor, so the charge dated 24.02.2009 framed against the petitioners by the learned S.D.J.M., Katihar and subsequent criminal proceeding against them is hereby set aside. In the result, this petition stands allowed.

¶23

(Arun Kumar, J)

¶24

Sujit/-

¶25

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAVDATE
UploadingDate	10.07.2017
Transmission Date	10.07.2017

Suresh Sah @ Suresh Lal Sah and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Sah @ Suresh Lal Sah and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

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

Rashmi Onkar Nath @ Onkar Nath @ Sunil Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Jai Ram Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Jeebachh Sada and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate, and Ors.

Mridula Sinha and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Baiju Mahto and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.