DELTA INSECTICIDES LIMITED Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of Criminal Misc. No. 20786-M of 1998 and Criminal Misc. No. 7627-M of 1999. Criminal Misc. No. 20786-M of 1998 has been filed by the Company which manufactures various types of insecticides and pesticides under a valid registration certificate in this regard issued by the appropriate authority. Criminal Misc. No. 7627-M of 1999 had been filed by the dealer and the distributor of insecticides. These petitioners sell the insecticides and pesticides in the original sealed and packed condition as packed by the original manufacturer without tampering the same in any manner.

(2.) ON 22.11.1993, Insecticide Inspector, Khanna, drew a sample of Insoproturon insecticide from the shop premises of petitioner No. 1 in Criminal Misc. No. 7627-M of 1999. Petitioner No. 2 in Criminal Misc. No. 7627-M of 1999 is the distributor of the manufacturer i.e. the petitioner in Criminal Misc. No. 20786-M of 1998. All the three petitioners were issued Show Cause Notice on 14.12.1993 stating therein that insecticide had been found to be misbranded. The manufacturer submitted the reply on 3.1.1994. In this reply, it is categorically stated that the manufacturer does not agree with the report of the Senior Analyst, Insecticide Testing Laboratory, Amritsar, and claims re-analysis of the insecticide in question from the Director of Central Insecticide Laboratory. Though this reply has been received by the respondents in time, yet no action has been taken by the respondents in this regard. Similarly, the distributor/dealer also submitted replies to the Show Cause Notice on 20.12.1993 and 23.12.1993. These petitioners had pointed out that the sample had been taken from a sealed container and they had not tampered with the seal. The packing of the container had been kept in the original condition. It was also requested that the sample be sent for re- testing by the Central Insecticides Laboratory. The same were also ignored. The complaint was filed on 9.2.1995 and the summoning order was issued on 28.11.1995.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, has submitted that the complaint was filed within stipulated period but the petitioners did not make any request for sending the sample for re-testing.