MOHINDER KUMAR HESHANE KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for consideration in the instant petition is as to whether a marketing agency/licensed dealer can be held responsible under the Insecticides Act, 1968, for the contents of the samples when it is not disputed that the seal of the sample was intact at the time of sampling?

(2.) The present petition has been filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.COMA-259 of 2018 (wrongly mentioned as filing No.COMA/1016/2018 in the head note of the petition), File No.178 dtd. 25/5/2018 (Annexure P-2) under Ss. 3k(i) 17, 18, 29 and 33 of Insecticides Act, 1968 and Rule 27 (5) of Insecticide Rules, 1971 titled as 'Punjab State Versus M/s Mohinder Kumar Heshane Kumar and Others' pending in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Talwandi Sabo as well as the subsequent proceedings including the order of summoning dtd. 25/5/2018 (Annexure P-4) being an abuse of the process of law and barred by limitation prescribed under Sec. 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as 'Cr.P.C.') and hit by Sec. 30(3) of The Insecticides Act, 1968.

(3.) The brief facts of the case as they emanate from the perusal of the petition are to the effect that the petitioner no.1 is the sole proprietorship firm of petitioner No.2 and the petitioners are engaged in the business of retail sale of various kinds of insecticides etc. used for common agricultural purposes. It is contended that on 24/9/2009, the respondent/complainant conducted a surprise inspection at the business premises of the petitioners and during the said inspection no irregularity was found with regard to the records of the petitioners or their licence to sell the insecticides. It is pointed out that the petitioners were holding a valid licence for selling insecticides which was valid till 31/12/2009.