C M PANCHAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revisionist, along with other accused persons, came to be convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Idar, for the offences punishable under Sections 3 (6) (1), 17 (1) (gh) and 18 of the Insecticides Act, 1968. The revisionist was original accused No. 8 and came to be prosecuted as the Manager of the Company. He was ordered to undergo S. I for three months with fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo further S. I for one month.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that the Agricultural Inspector visited the place of business of the accused persons and purchased medicine named "mega Toks". The medicine is supposed to have 10% of phorate, against that, phorate contents found to be 8. 90% and, therefore, a complaint came to be lodged alleging misbranding. The trial Court found the petitioner guilty by the impugned judgment, wherein other accused persons came to be acquitted for the reasons recorded therein. That acquittal order has attained the finality, as the same has not been challenged.

(3.) THE petitioner has taken a plea that the complainant is only Agricultural Inspector and has no authorization of Insecticides Inspector to lodge complaint, which can be done only by the Insecticides Inspector. The second contention that is raised is that there was want of sanction for prosecution.