PRASHANT L. HUNDEKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A private complaint is filed by the respondent under Sec. 200 of Cr.P.C alleging that bio-products manufactured by the company were sent to the analyst for test, and thereafter the analyst submitted the report that bio products manufactured by the company were miss-branded. The learned Magistrate after perusing the complaint registered the case against the petitioner- accused for the offence punishable under sec. 29 of Insecticides Act, 1968 (for short the Act). Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that report from analyst was obtained after 30 days from the date it was sent for analysis, which is contrary to sec. 24(1) of the Act. He submits that the company having not been arraigned as an accused, the petitioner who is director of the company, cannot be held vicariously guilty of the contravention of the said Act.

(3.) Learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State submits that petitioner having manufactured bio product which are miss-branded, has committed offence punishable under sec. 29 of the Act and the learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance for the aforesaid offence alleged against the petitioner.