PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Around 3.30 p.m. on May 31, 1984 respondent No. 3 found the petitioner in possession of 30 kilograms of red chillies powder for sale. Sample obtained by respondent No. 3 therefrom was found to be adulterated by the Public Analyst vide his report dated July 4, 1984 on account of its having in it ash insoluble in diluted hydrochloric acid (HCL), 1.76 percent as against the maximum prescribed standard of 1.3 percent and 1.45 per cent of grit. Respondent No. 3 filed criminal complaint No. P.F.A. case 814 against the petitioner before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat on August 13, 1984. The complaint case was being tried by the learned trial Court as warrant case. All of a sudden on August 2, 1988 learned trial Court ordered it to be tried in a summary way. The petitioner has, therefore, filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 7587 of 1988 for quashing the complaint as also the charge framed therein against him alleging that the learned trial Court having observed that the procedure being followed at the trial was illegal, the only course open to it was to order acquittal and not re-trial, as per procedure prescribed for the trial of summary cases.

(2.) I have heard Shri H.N. Mehtani Advocate for the petitioner, Shri P. 5. Chauhan, Advocate for the State and have carefully gone through the impugned order of the learned trial Court.

(3.) The proposition now convased in this Court by Shri H.N. Mehtani, learned counsel for the petitioner came to be considered earlier in Ram Chander v. State of Haryana, Chattar Bhuj v. State of Haryana, Ram Kishan v. State of Haryana, and Nand Lal v. State of Haryana, wherein it was repeatedly held that appropriate order to be passed by the learned trial Court in such circumstances would be of acquittal of the accused and not of retrial according to summary procedure as ordained by the learned trial Court in its impugned order of August 2, 1988.