N.S. BAWA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONCE again what precipitates is the action of the authorities in delaying the filing of the complaint and the consequences thereto. Despite repeated pronouncements from this Court directing that complaints must be filed at the earliest so that a valuable right of an accused is not lost, it appears that the concerned authorities make sure that the proceedings are quashed.

(2.) IN brief the relevant facts are that a sample of Dithane M-45 was drawn by one Sukhpal Singh from M/s Kisan Sewa Centre who is dealer of insecticide. The manufacturer is stated to be M/s Indofil Chemicals. N.S. Bawa is the Regional Sales Manager of M/s Indofil Chemicals. The sample was sent to the State Quality Control Insecticide Laboratory and was declared to be misbranded. It is the case of the prosecution that notice under Section 24(2) of the Insecticides Act was sent to the accused with a copy of the report.

(3.) THE petitioners prayed that they should be discharged for the reason that the shelf life of the product had expired on 31.3.1992. The sample was not accepted by the Director, Central Insecticides Laboratory as the shelf life had expired. This request was rejected holding that notice under sub- section (2) of Section 24 of the Insecticides Act had been issued to the dealer as well as the manufacturer. There was no prejudice caused and accordingly the petition was dismissed. As against the said order, the present revision petition has been filed.