Shaik Ayyub vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 229 Tel

              HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

                   CRIMINAL PETITION No.374 OF 2021

ORDER (ORAL):

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings in

C.C. No.176 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Adilabad, arising out of Crime No.21 of 2018 of Adilabad

II Town Police Station, Adilabad District, registered for the offences

punishable under Section 20(2) read with Section 7(2) of Cigarettes

and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and

Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and

Distribution) Act, 2003 (for short 'COTP Act'). The petitioner herein

is sole accused in the above crime.

2. Heard both sides and perused the material on record.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that

subject matter is squarely covered by an order in Chidurala

Shyamsubder v. State of Telangana1 rendered by the High Court of

Judicature at Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and Andhra

Pradesh, and placed a copy of the said judgment for perusal.

4. In Chidurala Shyamsubder (Supra 1), a learned single

Judge of the High Court following the guidelines laid down by the

Crl.P. No.3731 of 2018 & Batch dated 27.08.2018.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal2, held

that the police are incompetent to take cognizance of the offences

punishable under Sections 54 and 59 (1) of the Food Safety and

Standards Act, 2006 (for short 'FSS Act'), investigating into the

offences along with other offences under the provisions of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860, and filing charge sheet is a grave illegality, as the

Food Safety 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 Section 20(2) read with Section 7(2)

of COTP Act. Therefore, the said proceedings in C.C. No.176 of

2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Adilabad, against the petitioner herein is contrary to the principle held

in Chidurala Shyamsubder (Supra 1), as such, the same are liable to

be quashed.

5. In view of the above, the present Criminal Petition is

allowed in terms of the order in Chidurala Shyamsubder (Supra 1)

and the proceedings in C.C. No.176 of 2019 on the file of the learned

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adilabad, are hereby quashed

against the petitioner herein - sole accused.

6. Further, since the proceedings in the aforesaid case are

quashed against the petitioners herein in C.C. No.176 of 2019 on the

file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adilabad, the

1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335

petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate application for return of the

seized property including the seized vehicles, if any, and the learned

Magistrate shall consider the same and return the seized property and

vehicles on proper identification and verification of their ownership

under due acknowledgment.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in

the criminal petition, stand closed.

_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J February 2, 2021.

NOTE:

Registry is directed to annex a copy of the common order dated 27.08.2018 in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 & batch.

(BO) PV