RANDEEP PAPER BOARD MILLS Vs. THE STATE HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition seeks quashing of complaint under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act. In the complaint, it is alleged that on 16.12.1999, the Fertilizer Inspector checked the premises of Malhotra Traders and drew a sample of fertilizer manufactured by the petitioner company. On analysis, the sample was found to be non-standard. The petitioner made an application for re-analysis of the sample but the same has been rejected by the trial Court on the ground that there was no provision in the concerned fertilizer order entitling an accused to re-analysis and the question whether the sample had been properly analysed shall be seen at appropriate stage. Hence this petition.

(2.) IT is contended that though there is no provision for re-testing, the petitioners were entitled to seek re-testing and rejection of application of the petitioners for re-testing was not justified. Reliance is placed on M/s Janta Agro Fertilizers v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1994 Allahabad 164 and an unreported Division Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court in M/s Agarwal Pesticides and Chemical Industries v. State of Uttar Pradesh, decided on 29.1.1979.

(3.) THE view of the Division Bench was upheld by Full Benches of this Court in The Director, Agriculture, Punjab and others v. Narinder Pathak and other, 2000(4) RCR(Criminal) 526 (Punjab and Haryana) (FB) decided on 13.10.1999 and then by the Apex Court in A.S. Parmar v. State of Punjab and others, Civil Appeal No. 1465 of 2001 decided on 27.8.2002.