ARTEE MINERALS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal misc. petition under Sec. 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed by the petitioners-Manufactures, who are accused No. 3 and 4 in the original complaint, which the prayer that the proceedings of criminal case No. 162/87 State vs. M/s. Thakar Das Rajendra Kumar & Ors. for the offence under section 2, 18/29 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1968') pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Anoopgarh (Sri Ganganagar) be quashed.

(2.) IT arises in the following circumstances:- On 18. 4. 1987, a complaint was filed by the Insecticide Insepctor and District Agriculture Office, Rajasthan Canal Project, Anoopgarh (Sri Ganganagar) in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anoopgarh (Sri Ganganagar) against the present petitioners, who are Manufactures and respondents No. 2 M/s. Thakar Das Rajendra Kumar, Vijainagar (Sri Ganganagar) and its proprietor Narain Das, who are dealers. IT was stated in the complaint that on 12. 7. 1984, the Insecticide Inspector and District Agriculture Officer, Rajasthan Canal Project, Anoopgarh (Sri Ganganagar) took sample of the insecticide Rogor (Dimethoate) 30 EC from the premises of M/s. Thakar Das Rajendra Kumar, Sri Vijaynagar (Sri Ganganagar) in presence of its proprietor Narain Das (respondent No. 3), who were dealers and prepared fard and divided the sample into three parts as required by the law. One of the samples was sent for analysis to the State Pesticide Testing Laboratory Quality Control, Durgapura, Jaipur and the Insecticide Analyst, State Pesticide Testing Laboratory Quality Control, Jaipur gave his report on 28. 9. 1984, in which it was reported that the sample did not conform to the relevant is specification 3903-1975 in the active ingredient and hence, it was misbranded. IT was also stated in the report that batch number of the insecticide was 366 and date of manufacturing was July, 1983 and date of expiry was Jan. , 1985.

(3.) SEC. 21 of the Act of 1968 empowers the Insecticide Inspector to take samples of any insecticide and send such samples for analysis to the Insecticide Analyst for test in the prescribed manner and as per sub-SEC. (5) of SEC. 22 of the Act of 1968, he shall divide the sample into three portions and effectively seal and as per sub-section (6) of SEC. 22 one of the samples shall be forwarded by him to the Insecticide Analyst for test or analysis. As per SEC. 24 (1) of the Act of 1968, the Insecticide Analyst to whom a sample of any insecticide has been submitted for test or analysis under Sub-SEC. (6) of SEC. 22, shall, within a period of sixty days, deliver to the Insecticide Inspector submitting it a signed report in duplicate in the prescribed form and according to sub-sec. (2) of SEC. 24, the Insecticide Inspector on receipt thereof shall deliver one copy of the report to the person from whom the sample was taken and the report of the Insecticide Analyst shall be conclusive evidence unless the person from whom sample was taken, has within twenty eight days of the receipt of a copy of the report notified in writing the Insecticide Inspector or the court before which any proceedings in respect of the sample are pending that he intents to adduce evidence in controversion of the report. Sub- section (4) of SEC. 24 casts a duty on the Insecticide inspector to make compliance of the provisions for re-testing etc.