RAGHAV GUPTA & ORS. Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing of complaint case bearing no.26/2010 titled as "Food Inspector vs. Jogi Rawal & Ors." and for setting aside the summoning order dated 2.3.2010 passed by learned ACMM, Delhi.

(2.) THE aforesaid complaint was filed by the Food Inspector (PFA), Govt. of NCT of Delhi alleging therein that on 19.5.2008, a sample of "Snapple", an article of food, was taken from Jogi Rawal for analysis. The sample consisted of 3x473 ml. of "Snapple" taken as three originally sealed glass bottles bearing identical label declaration. The main declaration was noted by FI on Form VI. The sample after analysis was reported by Public Analyst as misbranded. As many as 15 persons were arrayed as accused in the said complaint. Vide order dated 2.3.2010, the learned ACMM while dropping proceedings against five accused, issued summons against the remaining eight. Four of them have challenged the said order by way of instant petition. The four petitioners herein are arrayed as accused no.10,11, 13 and 14. The allegations against accused no.10 and 11 were as under:

(3.) THE only contention that was raised by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners was that the averments in respect of petitioner Manish M. Vyas and Anand Loganathan (accused no.10 and 11) was that they were partners of M/s A&M Enterprises and that against petitioners Raghav Gupta and Deepak Kumar (accused no.13 and 14) were that they were directors of M/s V&V Beverages Pvt. Ltd. and that it was only "as such" that they were alleged to be incharge and responsible for conduct of day -to -day business of the firms. In other words, the submission was that the petitioners were not in -charge and responsible for conduct of day -to -day affairs and, therefore, they ought not to be arrayed as accused persons in the complaint. Reliance in this regard was placed on Municipal Corporation of Delhi v Ram Kishan Rohtagi and others [ : (1983) 1 SCC 1].