MONTARI INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that the complaint, Annexure P-1 is liable to be quashed on the sole ground that the petitioners have been prejudiced in their defence as they have been deprived of their valuable right to seek re-analysis of the third part of the sample from Central Insecticides Laboratory, through the intervention of the court, in terms of the provisions of Section 24(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (to be referred as, "the Act").

(2.) THE fact that the petitioners had, within 28 days of the receipt of copy of the report, duly notified in writing the Insecticide Inspector that they were disputing the correctness of the report of the Insecticide Analyst and they intended to adduce evidence to controvert this report, is not in dispute. Similarly, it has also not been disputed that by the time, the complaint was filed in court, shelf-life of the sample of insecticide had already expired.

(3.) CONFRONTED with the above judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, learned Deputy Advocate General very fairly conceded that the present case is squarely covered by this judgment. Placing reliance on the above referred to judgment of the Apex Court, this petition is allowed, and the complaint, Annexure P-1, is quashed. Petition allowed.