KRISHAN DAS SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner, seeking quashment of the order dated 6.9.1990 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (vide which the order dated 13.1.1990 passed by the Addl. C.J.M. was set aside), whereby the petitioner was ordered to be summoned as accused, in a case under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), filed by the State through Government Food Inspector, against Niranjan Lal, accused. By way of present petition, the petitioner is also seeking quashment of the subsequent order dated 5.10.1990, passed by the Addl. C.J.M., ordering summoning of the present petitioner as accused, in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 6.9.1990, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge.

(2.) FACTS , in brief, are that the Food Inspector had taken the sample of dal from the premises of accused Niranjan Lal. Since the said dal was found adulterated, on analysis by the Public Analyst, the complaint was filed against accused Niranjan Lal. During the pendency of the said complaint, accused Niranjan Lal moved an application before the trial Court, alleging therein that he had purchased the said dal from M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar, Nai Mandi, Narnaul, vide bill No. 1149 dated 21.1.1985 and that Suresh Kumar was proprietor of the said firm. It was further alleged that the (Niranjan Lal) had not changed the said dal after its purchase and the sample was taken by the Food Inspector from the said dal, which was purchased by him from M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar. It was further alleged that accused Niranjan Lal had also produced bill No. 1149 dated 21.1.1985 before the Food Inspector, at the time of taking the sample and the Food Inspector had also put his initials on the said bill. It was prayed in the said application that accused Niranjan Lal may be discharged and the firm M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar be summoned as accused in the said case. The said application of accused Niranjan Lal was contested by the Food Inspector, as also by the firm M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar (to whom the notice was also issued). They contested the said application, alleging therein that the sample was not taken from the sealed container and it was not possible to prove that the dal, which was allegedly sold by wholesale dealer to the accused, was the same dal, from which the sample was taken by the Food Inspector. It was alleged that admittedly the sample was not taken from a sealed container and it was not possible to prove that the dal, while in possession of the accused, was properly stored and that he had sold it in the same condition in which he had purchased it and that the wholesale dealer thus could not be summoned as accused in this case. After hearing both sides, learned Judicial Magistrate, vide order dated 13.1.1990, dismissed the aforesaid application of accused Niranjan Lal. Aggrieved against the said order of the learned magistrate, accused Niranjan Lal filed revision petition before, the Sessions Court. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, without issuing notice to the present petitioner, but after hearing the counsel for the accused Niranjan Lal and the State through Food Inspector, vide order dated 6.9.1990, accepted the revision petition, set aside the order dated 13.1.1990 passed by the Judicial Magistrate and directed the trial court to summon the firm M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar through its proprietor as accused for facing trial. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the learned Judicial Magistrate, ordered summoning of the present petitioner M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar as accused, vide order dated 5.10.1990. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge and the subsequent order of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, the present petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed by the petitioner M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar, seeking quashment of the aforesaid orders.

(3.) IN the present petition inter-alia it was alleged on behalf of the petitioner that no case for summoning present petitioner as accused was made out, on the facts and circumstances of the present case. It was alleged that if accused Niranjan Lal had purchased some dal from present petitioner M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar, as per bill No. 1149 dated 21.1.1985, even then there is nothing on record to show that the sample which was taken by the Food Inspector from the shop of accused Nirnajan Lal was taken from the same dal which was purchased by accused Niranjan lal from the present petitioner. It was alleged that the dal which was allegedly purchased by accused Niranjan Lal from M/s Shri Krishan Das Suresh Kumar, was in loose condition and similarly dal from which Food Inspector had taken sample was also in loose condition. It was further alleged that no case, whatsoever, was made out for ordering the summoning of the present petitioner as accused.