RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Raj Kumar-petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the quashment of the criminal complaint under the provisions of the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Rules framed thereunder.

(2.) It has been submitted before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no sanction, as required under Section 31 of the aforesaid Act, had been granted by the Sanctioning Authority for the prosecution of the present petitioner-Raj Kumar, in his individual capacity and as such the proceedings against him are liable to be quashed. He has placed reliance on the Sanction Order, copy Annexure P-2 in this regard.

(3.) I have gone through the Sanction Order, Annexure P-2. As per the said Sanction Order, the Joint Director, Agriculture, exercising the powers under Section 31 of the Insecticides Act, had granted sanction for initiating prosecution against M/s Hari Ram Raj Kumar, Barnala. There is nothing to show that sanction was granted for the prosecution of present petitioner-Raj Kumar, in his individual capacity. Even if, Raj Kumar-petitioner was a partner of the aforesaid firm, M/s. Hari Ram Raj Kumar, still he could not be prosecuted in his individual capacity, in the absence of sanction in this regard, in view of the law laid down by this Court, in the case reported as Manjit Singh Guliani v. State of Punjab, 2002 2 RCR(Cri) 50.