(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer for quashing the proceedings pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, on the basis of the complaint (Annexure 4) under Sections 3(k)(1), 17, 18, 29 and 33 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (herein after referred to as the Act) read with Rule 27(5) of the Insecticides Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).
(2.) On 7-7-1992, Insecticide Inspector, Jandialai, drew a sample of pesticide Dimethoate 30 % (Diadhan 30 %) Batch No. 775 from the premises of M/s. Zamindara Preticides Katani Kalan. The said insecticide was manufactured by the petitioners. The date of manufacture of the sample was Sept. 1991 and the date of expiry was Feb. 1993. The sample was sent by the Insecticide Inspector to the Chief Agricultural Officer, Ludhiana, who in turn sent the sample for analysis to the Insecticides Analyst, Amritsar. The Analyst, by his report dated 16-7-1992, held that the sample was misbranded. Attested copy of the Analyst report was sent to the petitioner No. 1 on 21-7-1992. The letter was received by the petitioner on 25-7-1992. Within the stipulated period of 28 days, the petitioner sent a reply dated 8-8-1992. In the reply, it was, inter alia, stated that the insecticide is manufactured as per relevant ISI specifications. It is stated that at the time of manufacture, Batch No. 755 was found to contain the correct ingredients conforming to the relevant ISI specifications. On receipt of the letter from the respondents, the petitioner had again analysed the sample and found the same to be within the ISI specifications. Thereafter, it is mentioned as follows :-
(3.) This letter was duly received by the respondents. Inspite of the request having been made, the same was not sent for analysis to the Central Insecticides Testing Laboratory, as required under Section 24 of the Act. Thereafter, the complaint was filed on 26-8-1993, which is clearly beyond the expiry date of the sample.