MANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.334 of 2018 pending on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad for the offence under Sec. 353 of IPC.

(2.) On 5/8/2018, complaint was lodged by the Assistant Controller, Legal Metrology stating that they went to canteen for the purpose of inspection in the GVK Inox, Banjara Hills. At the time of inspection at 4.00 p.m, they found certain violations under Legal Metrology Act. Panchanama was conducted and as part of the inspection, billing machines were seized. The said inspection was carried on from 4.00 pm onwards. Around 5.00 p.m, the petitioner, who is the Regional Manager, obstructed them from seizing the billing units. The petitioner called his security men who have physically obstructed the legal metrology personnel, however, they managed to seize the property and exit the premises. For the reason of obstruction, the petitioner being the manager therein, who obstructed the legal metrology officials from seizing the billing machines amounted to an offence under Sec. 353 of IPC, as such, complaint was lodged. After investigation the police filed charge sheet against this petitioner for the said offence.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that none of the ingredients under Sec. 353 of IPC are made out, as there was no interference with the inspection process taken up. However there was a request by the petitioner asking the officials not to take the billing machines, as it would cause the business to come to a standstill. Further, W.P.No.27029 of 2018 was filed by the association of multiplexes and theaters questioning the department's notification which was issued in respect of non-packaged food items sold by the multiplexes and other theaters. Though the writ petition questioning the said notification was heard and reserved for orders, the Legal Metrology officials have fraudulently conducted such inspection. In support of his contentions, he relied on the judgments reported in the case of Shaik Shabbir Shaik Ahmed v. The State of Telangana [Criminal Petition No.5338 of 2022, dtd. 23/6/2022 and Jaganath Enterprises v. the State of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Petition No.5421 of 2019, dtd. 18/12/2019.