MAHESH SINGH RAJ PUROHITH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.962 of 2020 on the file of the XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Nampally, against the petitioner/Accused No.2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 272, 273 and 188 of IPC and Section 20 (2) of Cigarette & Tobacco Product Act, 2003 (for short 'COTPA Act').

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the subject matter is squarely covered by a common order in Chidurala Shyamsubder v. State of Telangana , Crl.P.No.3731 of 2018 & batch, decided on 27.08.2018 rendered by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, and placed copy of the said judgment for perusal.

(3.) In Chidurala Shyamsubder 's case (supra), a learned Single Judge of the High Court, following the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal , 1992 Supp1 SCC 335 held that the Police are incompetent to take cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 45 and 59(1) of the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act, 2006, investigating into the offences along with other offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and filing charge sheet is grave illegality, as the Food Officer alone is competent to investigate and to file charge sheet following the Rules laid down under Sections 41 and 42 of FSS Act, whereas, in the present case, the Police have registered the crime for the offences under 272, 273 and 188 of IPC and Section 20 (2) of COTPA Act. Therefore, the said proceedings in C.C.No.962 of 2020 against the petitioner herein are contrary to the principle held by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in Chidurala Shyamsubder (supra) and, accordingly, the same are liable to be quashed.