SURESH GARG, MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this order, I will dispose of Crl.Misc. No. 22205-M of 1997 and Crl.Misc. No. 22207 of 1997 as both these petitions pertain to the quashing of complaint filed by the Government Food Inspector under section 7/16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the Act) against him (petitioner) and one Bans Raj, Annexure P-9 and other consequential and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom including the summoning order Annexure P3/A dated 6.1.1994 served on him (Suresh Garg) on 21.5.1997 requiring him to appear on 21.7.1997 in the court.

(2.) FACTS are being taken from Crl.Misc. No. 22205-M of 1997. Facts :- On 20.10.1993, Rajesh Kumar Jindal, Govt. Food Inspector authorised to function as Food Inspector in all the local areas of Ropar District vide Punjab Govt. Notification No. FD(1)Pb-91/14763 dated 9.10.1991 under section 9 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act), along with Dr. A.K. Khullar, inspected the premises of Bans Raj at 12.10 PM on 20.10.1993 situated at Kurali and found Shri Bans Raj in possession of 5 quintals of mixed milk contained in drums for sale for human consumption. "Food Inspector" after disclosing his identity to Bans Raj that he was "Food Inspector" authorised to take samples of food stuff from their vendors with a view to have them analysed from the Public Analyst, purchased 750 ml of mixed milk on payment of Rs. 6/- to him against proper receipt. Before he took 750 mls. of mixed milk from Bans Raj, he thoroughly stirred the milk contained in the drum and made it homogeneous. Food Inspector divided the milk so purchased in three equal parts. He put each part in separate dry and clean bottles. He added 20 drops of formalin each bottle as preservative. Bottles were stoppred tightly, labelled and wrapped in thick paper separately and paper slip bearing the code number of the office of local health authority Ropar with his signatures thereon was pasted on the wrapper of each part of the sample lengthwise covering the mouth and bottom of the container and joining its ends. It was then secured with a strong twine and the bottles were then sealed at the spot with intact seal impression with distinct seals. Signatures of the vendor were obtained on each part of the sample in the prescribed manner i.e. partly on wrapper and partly on slip. The samples were also signed by the Food Inspector. Food Inspector sent one part of the sample to the Public Analyst, Jalandhar along with form VII and seal impression used in sealing the sample in a sealed parcel through special messenger. Per that special messenger, one copy of the memo and specimen impression of the seal used in sealing the packet were also delivered in a separate sealed cover under intimation to the local health authority, Ropar. Food Inspector deposited the other two sealed parts of the sample with two copies of form VII in sealed form with the local health authority.

(3.) IN support of this prayer for quashing of complaint Annexure P-9 and the summoning order Annexure P3/A against Suresh Garg requiring him to appear on 6.7.1997 in the court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Suresh Garg is the Managing Director of M/s Himachal Milk Specialities Limited, Paonta Sahib, H.P. which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act with the Registrar of Companies, Jalandhar and the company is engaged in the manufacture of the milk products i.e. Ghee, Skimmed milk power, dairy whitener and holds a licence to manufacture and sell ghee, skimmed milk powder and dairy whitener since 1989 and not in the sale of raw milk. It was submitted by him that the company does not sell raw milk at all in Punjab, Haryana or elsewhere and sells only milk products as named above in accordance with the licence. Manufacture of milk products is done in Paonta Sahib where the factory is situated and milk products are sent to Guwahati, Calcutta, Haryana, U.P. and Himachal Pradesh. There are not even any distributors for the sale of milk products of the petitioner company in Punjab. He submitted that for the purpose of manufacturing of milk products, he got raw material i.e. milk from various places like Sirhind, Malerkotla, Sangrur in Punjab, Kurukshetra, Shahbad and Pundri areas in Haryana and some areas in U.P. such as Badayun, Amroha, Islam Nagar, Saharanpur, Roorkie and some local areas of Himachal Pradesh. It was submitted that the milk thus collected from various collection centres authorised by him is purchased and brought to the plant and products are made. Company is the purchaser of raw milk and not seller of raw, milk and deals in the sale of milk products only. It was submitted that no complaint was competent against him and no order of summoning could be passed against him. It was also submitted that so far as Bans Raj is concerned, he had nothing to do with him. Company has no collection centre at Kurali. Bans Raj was not the employee of the company. He was not directly or indirectly connected with the company. It was submitted that request was made to the "Food Inspector" that facts should be verified since the sample milk was not connected with him (petitioner). For more than 3 years, no communication was received by him from the "Food Inspector". It was only in May 1997 that summons were received by him from the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kharar calling upon him to appear on 6.7.1997. In nutshell, the petitioner's plea is that this company deals in the sale of milk products only. It does not deal in the sale of raw milk. It purchases raw milk from various collection centres and is involved only in the manufacturing of milk products. It does not deal in raw milk. Secondly, Bans Raj was not the employee of the company. There is no milk collection centre of the company at Kurali, as such Bans Raj could not claim any connection with this company.