[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Vijaykumar S/O Motumal Chugwani vs State Of Mah. Thr. Its ... on 16 February, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:2701-DB
apl409.2020.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 409 OF 2020
APPLICANT :- Vijaykumar s/o Motumal Chugwani,
Aged about 39 years,
Occu: Business,
R/o Near Masani Hotel, Madhi
Square Matatoli Rajendra Ward
Gondia-441601 (Maharashtra)
..VERSUS..
RESPONDENTS :- 1) State of Maharashtra, through its
Officer-in-charge of Police Station
Deori, Gondia.
Amended carried out as 2) Food and Drugs Administration
per Courts order dated
09/09/2020. (M.S.) Smt. Geetabai Wanjari
House,
Takiya Ward, Near Sai Mandir,
Bhandara-441904.
Through its Food Safety Officer, Shri
Piyush Vasantrao Manvatkar.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Sahil S. Dewani, counsel for applicant.
Ms S.V. Kolhe, APP for respondent/State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.
DATE OF RESERVE : 29/01/2026
DATE OF DECISION : 16/02/2026
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent of learned counsel Mr. Sahil S. Dewani for the applicant
rkn
apl409.2020.odt
and Ms. S.V. Kolhe, learned APP for respondent/State, None for the
respondent No.2, the application is taken up for final hearing at
the stage of admission.
2. By this application, the applicant is seeking quashment
of the proceedings bearing Chargesheet No.25 of 2022, dated
19/05/2022, arising out of Crime No. 331 of 2018 lodged by
respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 188,
328 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 and Section 3(1), (zz) (iii),
26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), (e) of the Food Safety and Standards Act,
2006.
3. In short, the case of the prosecution is that
Commissioner, Food Training Department, Government of
Maharashtra, issued a notification dated 20/07/2018 by exercising
the powers contemplated under Section 30(2)(a) of Food Safety
and Standards Act, 2006, whereby imposed complete prohibition
and restrictions of tobacco and kharra, betel nuts, scented tobacco
and other food articles which are mentioned in the notification. As
such, the State Government has imposed complete ban on the
possession, sale, purchase and transportation of such articles in
public interest, so as to avoid that general public should not be
infected by human life threatening diseases like cancer.
4. However, in violation of this notification, one M/s Shahu
Traders, who was found during raid of possessing all these
contraband articles. It is stated that during the course of
investigation, co-accused has informed that the present applicant
use to supply scented chewing tobacco and other prohibited
materials to the accused for the purpose of sale. On the basis of
this statement, the offence came to be registered against the
rkn
apl409.2020.odt
present applicant.
5. It is the submission of present applicant that,
considering the averments made in the FIR, there are no specific
allegations against present applicant that he had any time stored,
manufactured or possessed anything has been seized from the
present applicant during the investigation, which is prohibited as
per the notification dated 20/07/2018. Therefore, in absence of
any such allegation against the present applicant, only on the basis
of statement of one of the witness that applicant used to supply
them the contraband articles, cannot be a reason to prosecute him
in the matter. Hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court in the
matter.
6. In the light of the submissions made by applicant in the
present case, I have perused the complaint which was lodged by
present respondent No.1. It is clear that the entire allegation in the
present matter about violation of the notification dated
20/07/2018 was against the M/s Sahu Traders. So also, the
documents enclosed with the chargesheet shows that as per the
raid dated 11/12/2018, the contraband articles were seized from
the custody of M/s Shau Traders, Deori, District Gondia. There is
no material on record that on 11/12/2018, or thereafter, any
contraband material was collected from the present applicant.
7. It is pertinent to note that Investigating Officer has
seized the contraband articles from the present applicant for
previously on 12/07/2018, and on that basis, it is stated that at
earlier occasions, the contraband articles were seized from the
present applicant, the offence is registered against the present
applicant.
rkn
apl409.2020.odt
8. In my opinion, from the documents available on record,
it is clear that from 11/12/2018 onwards, nothing has been seized
from the present applicant. The respondent, in his affidavit, has
specifically stated that only on the basis of the statement of one of
the witnesses during the investigation, the offence was registered,
but after visiting the shop of the applicant at Gondia, no
incriminating material was found. Therefore, considering this
aspect of the matter, no offence is made out against the present
applicant.
9. It is clear from the record that only the applicant is
having a track record as contraband articles were seized from him
on 12/07/2018 but it cannot be a reason to implicate him along
with co-accused in the matter. It is not open to the prosecution
prosecute the applicant for the seizure of contraband articles
earlier to this offence.
10. In my opinion, as no incriminating material has been
seized from the applicant, therefore, no offence is made out
against him as alleged in the matter. Hence, the application
deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the
following order:
ORDER
A] The criminal application is allowed.
B] The proceedings bearing Summary Case No. 119 of 2022
pending before the District and Sessions Judge, Gondia,
along with Chargesheet No.25 of 2022, dated
19/05/2022, arising out of Crime No. 331 of 2018
lodged by respondent No.1 for the offence punishable
rkn
apl409.2020.odt
under Section 188, 328 of the Indian Penal code, 1860
and Section 3(1), (zz) (iii), 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), (e) of
the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, are hereby
quashed and set aside against applicant.
11. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No order
as to costs.
(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J)
rkn
