DEVI CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforementioned Criminal Revision Petitions/Misc. petition have been preferred against the order dated 20-8-1993 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2. Udaipur, whereby he framed charge against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short the Act) and ordered for further proceedings in Cr. Case No. 493/1973 pending before him. Accordingly these petitions are being decided by a common order.

(2.) The skeletal facts of this case, which is pending before the learned trial Magistrate since 24-9-1973, can be briefly recapitulated like this. It appears that on 3-7-1973, Qayyum Ali, Food Inspector. Udaipur purchased 1.5 kg. Prabhat vegetable Ghee from accused Laxmi Lal Pujari (now expired), the paid Salesman of the fair price shop of Ward No. 8, Udaipur, which was being run by the Udaipur Sahakari Upbhokta Bhandar (in short USUB). The said Food Inspector equally distributed in three parts the vegetable Ghee so purchased by him, poured the same in three empty fails and scaled those samples in presence of motbirs. One sealed sample was given to Laxmi Lal Pujari. On 31-7-1973, another sealed sample was sent for chemical analysis to the Public Analyst, Public Health Laboratory, Udaipur, who vide his report dated 14-8-1973 Ex. P4 opined that the said sample of vegetable Ghee was adulterated. The Food Inspector came to know that co-accused Balwant Singh Bolia was the Executive Officer of USUB. The Commissioner Municipal Council, Udaipur (Local Authority) accorded necessary sanction under Section 20 of the Act for the prosecution of the said Laxmi Lal Pujari (vendor) and Balwant Singh Bolia for offence under Section 7/16 of the Act and also authorised the Food, Inspector to lay the complaint and prosecute them. On 24-9-1973, the Food Inspector filed criminal complaint Ex. P11 in the Court of Municipal Magistrate, Udaipur against them. On 6-2-74 and 11-6-74, the statement of PW 1 Qayyum Ali the Food Inspector was recorded as pre-charge evidence. After hearing the APP and the Advocate for the said accused persons, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, to whom the case was transferred by his order dated 2-7-1974, refrained from framing any charge, against Laxmi Lal Pujari and Balwant Singh Bolia at that stage, but under Section 20A of the Act impleaded the manufacturers of Ghee namely Bhavnagar Vegetable Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bhavnagar, Gujarat (in short BVML), petitioners Devi Chand, Depot Manager and Laxmi Path as Local representative of BVML and summoned them through bailable warrants. The learned CJM by his order dated 6-11-1974, accepting the application filed by the APP clarified that by his Order dated 2-7-74, the manufacturers which included the Directors of the Company, had also been impleaded as accused persons. Accordingly, he issued bailable warrants against as many as eleven Directors and the Secretary of the said company, whose names were enumerated in APP's application. On 1-10-75, the APP moved another application praying that the company Bhavnagar Vegetable Products Ltd., Bhavnagar (in short BVPL) itself be also impleaded as an accused. The CJM by his order dated 17-11-75 further clarified that by his order dated 2-7-74, the manufacturing company of the said Vegetable Ghee namely BVPL was also impleaded as an accused. Appearance on behalf of the BVPL was entered on 2-7-76. On the same day an application was filed on behalf of the BVPL that it had gone into liquidation and liquidation proceedings, were pending before the Gujarat High Court, that all its Directors and the Secretary have resigned and, therefore, permission for arraying them as accused persons may he sought from the said High Court. Again on 21-3-77, a similar application was filed stating that BVPL has already gone into liquidation and that the liquidation has taken in his possession all the assets and the properties of the said company and that necessary permission be sought from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court for appointing some one to defend the accused BVPL company. Thereupon, the learned Magistrate entered into correspondence with the Gujarat High Court for number of years. On 16-12-1981, liquidator appointed by the Gujarat High Court informed the CJM that the company BVPL has already been taken over by the National Dairy Development Board, Anand by an order passed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Thereupon, the learned Magistrate vide his order dated 22-7-83 summoned the liquidator to appear, and defend the accused company BVPL. On 24-4-1984, the accused - Director of BVPL by an application informed the learned trial Magistrate that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court had not yet granted permission to the liquidator to appear and defend the company BVPL and, therefore, proceedings against the said company could not proceed further. However, since the Director and the Secretary had put their appearance in the Court, the Magistrate recorded the statement of motbir Devi Lal on 22-1-87 as pre-charge evidence. On 12-3-1987, it was reported that as many as seven Directors of BVPL namely Navin Chandra, Ratan Lal, Dhiraj Lal, Nagar Mal, Fida Hussain, Mangi Lal and Mausum Ali have died. Therefore, from 12-3-198 7/07/1993, the trial in this case could not proceed and the proceedings were simply confined for the confirmation of the deaths of the aforementioned seven Directors, who had allegedly died pending trial. It may also be mentioned that on 27-6-90, there was a report on the warrant of Laxmi Lal Pujari. Vendor that he had died and as such proceedings against him were dropped. On 20-8-93, it was further reported that accused Nissar Ahmed and Abdul Hussain, Directors of the Company BVPL have also expired. Hence proceedings against them were dropped. On that day the trial Magistrate also revoked his earlier order summoning the official liquidator of the company BVPL on the ground that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court had not granted permission to the official liquidator to defend the BVPL company. The effect of the said order was that the BVPL company ceased to be an accused. On 20-8-93, the learned trial Magistrate without passing any formal order for dropping the proceedings against the aforementioned various Directors of BVPL, who were impleaded as accused persons, and reported to have expired, framed the charge for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Act against six accused persons namely (1) Balwant Singh and petitioners (2) Devi Chand, (3) Laxmi Path (wrongly mentioned as Laxmi Lal), (4) Mohammed Hussain, (5) Ahmed Hussain and (6) Krit Kumar and since they were not present in person on that day in the Court, their plea was recorded through their respective Advocates. On 20-8-93 itself the learned Magistrate also recorded the statement of PW Abdul Rahim and allowed further cross examination of Food Inspector Qayyum Ali. He further directed all the accused persons to appear in person on 4-10-93 for recording their statements under Section 313 Cr. P.C. He further directed that the prosecution could also produce its witness Devi Lal for further cross-examination on that day. Aggrieved by the said order dated 20-8-93, these petitions have been filed. By this Court's interim order dated 13-9-93, the proceedings in the case have been stayed.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor at length and carefully perused the record of the lower Court in extenso.