Praveen Reddy And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 7012 Kant

                         1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
               KALABURAGI BENCH

   DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH


       CRIMINAL PETITION No.200449/2021

BETWEEN:

1. PRAVEEN REDDY K.,
   S/O K. BALAKRISHNA REDDY
   AGE: 49 YEARS
   OCC: REGIONAL BUSINESS MANAGER
   IN M/S PIONEER HYBRID
   INTERNATIONALS SEEDS (P) LTD., HUBLI
   R/O NO.52/1, 8TH CROSS ROAD,
   TIMBER YARD, UNAKAL
   HUBLI-580031.

2. SURESH S/O SIDDAPPA HAVERI
   AGE: 53 YEARS
   OCC: BUSINESS, R/O NO.2A
   KRISHNAMACHARI ROAD,
   BELLARY-583101.
                                   ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI R.S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE)


AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST. DIRECTOR
OF AGRICULTURE/SPEED INSPECTOR,
                             2




LINGASUGUR, RAICHUR,
REPRESENTED BY THE
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585102.
                                      ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP)


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND THEREBY QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 05.11.2018 TAKING COGNIZANCE AND
ISSUE OF PROCESS BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, LINGASUGUR IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.950/2010 FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE
SEEDS ACT, 1966 ALONG WITH SECTIONS 3 AND 7 OF
THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT AND ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF AND THERETO, AGAINST
THE PETITIONERS.


     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                      ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the

respondent-State.

2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C., praying this Court to quash the order dated

05.11.2018 taking cognizance and issue of process by the

Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, in Criminal

Case No.950/2010 for the offence punishable under

Section 19 of the Seeds Act, 1966 along with Sections 3

and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short

'EC Act') and all further proceedings arising out of and

thereto, against the petitioners.

       3.   Factual     matrix         of    the   case   is    that   the

respondent-State      filed        private   complaint     against     the

petitioners herein arraying them as accused Nos.1 and 2

and other accused persons. The learned Magistrate

dispensed recording of sworn statement since the

complainant is a government servant and took cognizance

for the offence punishable under Section 19 of the Seeds

Act, 1966 along with Sections 3 and 7 of the EC Act.

Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing

petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying this Court to

quash the order of taking cognizance vide order dated

05.11.2018 for the above offences.

4. The main contention of the learned counsel for

the petitioners before this Court is that the order of the

learned Magistrate has resulted in miscarriage of justice

and he has not applied his mind before taking cognizance.

On perusal of the face value of the complaint, no offence is

made out and ingredients of the said offences also not

attract. The complaint is very vague. It is also contended

that the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioners

stand vitiated on the count of non-examination of the

seeds by the State Seeds Laboratory and the learned

Magistrate ought not to have proceeded against the

petitioners in the absence of report from the State Seeds

Laboratory. It is also contended that the statute mandates

the seeds sample to be chemically analyzed only in State

Seeds Lab created under the Seeds Act. In the absence of

report of State Seeds Laboratory, no offence under the

Seeds Act can be attributed. The learned counsel in

support of his arguments relied upon the order dated

11.01.2019 passed by this Court in Criminal Petition

No.101598/2016 wherein this Court in detail discussed in

paragraph-16 with regard to report has to be obtained

from the Laboratory and with regard to sample reanalysis

by the Central Seeds Laboratory. No such sample report is

collected in this case and hence, the order passed by this

Court is aptly applicable to the case on hand. This Court at

paragraph-18 of the order has discussed with regard to

complaint and on the point of limitation also Court quashed

the proceedings.

5. The learned counsel also relied upon the recent

order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition

No.201518/2021 disposed of on 18.11.2021 wherein this

Court taking note of Section 10 of the EC Act observed

that when the allegation is against Company and the

offence is committed by the Company, in the absence of

making Company as party to the proceedings, the

proceedings cannot be continued.

6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submits that

seeds which have been sold by the petitioners and other

accused persons were defective seeds and as a result,

there was loss of crop. Seeds were not subjected for

examination. Since defective seeds are supplied, they are

responsible for the loss of crop.

7. Having Heard the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and also on

perusal of the contents of the complaint, allegation is

made that defective seeds are supplied and as a result,

there was loss of crop. In the case on hand, offence under

Section 19(a) of the Seeds Act is invoked, apart from that

offences under Sections 3 and 7 of the EC Act are invoked.

Section 19(a) of the Seeds Act says that if any person

contravenes any provision of this Act or any rule made

thereunder shall be convicted for the first offence with fine

which may extend to five hundred rupees, and in the event

of such person having been previously convicted of an

offence under this Section, with imprisonment for a term

which may extent to six months, or with fine which may

extend to one hundred rupees, or with both. This has been

considered by this Court in Criminal Petition

No.101598/2016. The allegation against the petitioners is

that they have supplied defective seeds. But in the case

on hand, first of all, seeds have not been seized and sent

for test. There is no analyzer report either from the State

Seeds Laboratory or from the Central Seeds Laboratory. In

the absence of the same, criminal prosecution is initiated

against the petitioners. The said aspect is considered by

this Court in Criminal Petition No.101598/2016 particularly

in paragraph-16 and if any report is collected and an

opportunity has to be given to get the report from the

Central Seeds Laboratory under Section 16(3) of the Seeds

Act. In the case on hand, petitioners stand in better

footing since no such analysis report is collected by

sending the samples of the seeds. In the absence of

report, the Court cannot come to the conclusion that the

very seeds supplied are defective and not complied with

Section 16(3) of the Seeds Act. In the absence of Central

Seeds Laboratory analysis report or State Seeds

Laboratory analysis report, there cannot be any

prosecution against the petitioners. Hence, the same is

covered by the judgment of this Court referred to supra.

Therefore, I am of the opinion that in the absence of such

report, if the prosecution is continued against the

petitioners it amounts to an abuse of process and if this

Court fails to exercise power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,

it leads to miscarriage of justice.

8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass

the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed.

The impugned order of taking cognizance dated

05.11.2018 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,

Lingasugur, in C.C.No.950/2010 against two petitioners is

hereby quashed.

In view of disposal of the main petition,

I.A.No.1/2021 for stay does not survive for consideration

and accordingly, it is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NB*