GODAVARI CHEMICALS Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry in S.T.C.No.5 of 1999 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 19(a) of the Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1985 (for short 'the Control Order') r/w Section 7 (1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows: A.1-M/s.Godavari Chemicals is a manufacturing company of Zinc Sulphate 21% and A.2 is the proprietor of A.1. On 20.06.1996, P.W.3-Fertiliser Inspector and Agricultural Officer, Rajahmundry (Rural) visited the manufacturing unit of A.1, inspected the zinc sulphate and drawn four samples of zinc sulphate from four lots. He has drawn 2 Kgs zinc sulphate from 80 bags of 10 Kgs each, and after following due procedure, handed over one sample along with Forms K & J to A.2 under proper acknowledgement. He also sent one sample for analysis by registered parcel to the Assistant Director of Agriculture, F.C.O Laboratory, Anantapur, who tested the sample and gave a report opining that the said sample was not as per the specifications. On receipt of the said report, P.W.3 inspected the factory of A.1 on 16.07.1996 and on verification of stock register and godown he found that there was no stock of zinc sulphate available in the premises. He handed over the analyst report to A.2 and seized stock register, bill books and conducted panchanama in the presence of mediators, and on the same day, he handed over the records to the Assistant Director of Agriculture (R), Rajahmundry, who issued a letter to A.1 to furnish the names and addresses of the person's in-charge of production, marketing and chemist by registered post. In pursuance of the said letter, A.2 furnished the particulars of the responsible persons including herself, who was also in-charge of production. After obtaining necessary permission to prosecute A.1 and A.2, the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Rajahmundry lodged a complaint, which was taken on file as S.T.C.No.5 of 1999. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.11. No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the accused.

(2.) On analysis of the above said evidence, the learned Judge having held that the accused are guilty of the said offences and sentenced the first accused to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and the second accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for four weeks. As against the said judgment, the accused preferred this appeal. Sri Ch.Dhanamjaya, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, has drawn my attention to Clause 30 of the Control Order and contended that any sample collected shall be sent to the laboratory within a period of seven days from the date of its drawal and in the instant case, there is absolutely no proof establishing the said fact. In support of his contention, he has drawn my attention to the Judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Maharastra v. Rajkaran.

(3.) It is true that Clause 30 of the Control Order prescribes the time limit of seven days for dispatch of the sample and the said provision, in my considered view, is mandatory and any deviation from the said provision would be to the benefit of the accused persons. But, in the instant case, the Agricultural Officer, who was examined as P.W.3, has clearly stated that he inspected the business premises of A.1 on 20.06.1996 and collected the sample. There cannot be any dispute about the said date, since Forms J & K, which are indicating the particulars of fertilizer sample etc., are also dated 20.06.2006, and the Manager of A.1-firm also signed on Form J on 20.06.2006. Thus, it is clear that the alleged inspection had taken place on 20.06.1996. There is also no dispute about the receipt of the said sample by the analyst, as Ex.P.1- analyst report establishes the fact that the sample was received by him on 01.07.1996 and the analysis has taken place from 01.07.1996 to 04.07.1996. Thus, the gap between the drawal of the sample and receipt of the same by the analyst is ten days i.e., from 20.06.1996 to 01.07.1996.