LAWS(CHH)-2011-9-16

IQBAL ABDUL KHALIQ AHMED Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On September 09, 2011
IQBAL ABDUL KHALIQ AHMED Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 6-8-2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kawardha in Criminal Case No. 15/2003, whereby after dismissing the application for proceeding against the petitioners under Section 319 of the Cr.PC for commission of offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954(for short 'the Act'), again allowed the application filed under Section 20 of the Act and directed to implead the petitioners, i.e.. Board of Director as an accused.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that the petitioners are members of Board of Director of M/s Recon Oil Industries Limited. Vide order dated 31-8-95, the aforesaid company has appointed Mr. Sreepathi, Commercial Manager of the Company as nominee under Section 17 (2) of the Act as nominee for conduct of the business of the Company and intimated the same to local health authorities including the Joint Director, Food & Drugs, Rajnandgaon. As per complaint, on 29-10-93 samples of oil manufactured by the company have been taken from Ramanuj and Atturam, which were subsequently found adulterated. After obtaining permission to file complaint against the aforesaid accused and nominee Mr. Sreepathi, the Food Inspector has filed complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kawardha. During the course of trial, the Food Inspector has filed one application for impleading the aforesaid petitioners as an accused under Section 319 of the Cr.PC, which was dismissed by the Court vide order dated 1-11-99. Thereafter on the basis of statement of Mr. Sreepathi alleged nominee, application under Section 20 of the Act and the Court has proceeded against the present Board of Directors by impleading them as an accused.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned and other documents filed on behalf of the petitioners.