Telangana High Court
Sri.Gorantla Satyanarayana vs The State Of Telangana on 21 March, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
*****
Criminal Petition No.3117 OF 2022
Between:
Gorantla Satyanarayana. ... Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad and another ... Respondents
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 21.03.2023
Submitted for approval.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
1 Whether Reporters of Local
newspapers may be allowed to see Yes/No
the Judgments?
2 Whether the copies of judgment
may be marked to Law Yes/No
Reporters/Journals
3 Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship
wish to see the fair copy of the Yes/No
Judgment?
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
2
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER
+ CRL.P. No.3117 of 2022
% Dated 21.03.2023
# Gorantla Satyanarayana ... Petitioner
And
$ The State of Telangana,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad ... Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri A.Laxminarayana
^ Counsel for the Respondents: Sri S.Sudershan
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3117 of 2022
ORDER:
1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the
proceedings against the petitioner/Accused No.1 in
C.C.No.415 of 2021 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of
First Class at Mahabubnagar.
2. The complainant is the Mandal Agricultural Officer,
who on information raided the premises of the petitioner
on 17.02.2020, having information about the fertilizer
being sold along with independent witnesses and other
officials. The Officer found that the petitioner was making
fertilizer and stored raw material of bio products. The said
bio products were totally worth Rs.94.00 lakhs. The
fertilizers were being made without any licence and
without having any label. The material was seized on
suspicion that such products were being made and sold to
farmers. Having conducted panchanama, the samples
collected during the search were also sent for analysis.
The said samples which were sent for analysis were found
to be "not of standard quality".
3. During the course of investigation, it was further
found that the petitioner/A1 was purchasing chemicals
from Basheerbagh area of Hyderabad and labeling them
with various brands and selling them to farmers. The
products that are being sold are in violation of the
directions of this Court in W.P.No.25293 of 2014. The
products found were affecting the growth of yield of crops
as such, the farmers were being cheated. For the reason of
cheating innocent farmers and earning money running
into crores, charge sheet was filed by the police for the
offences under Sections 420, 120(B), 482 R/w 34 of IPC &
Sections 12, 13(1)(a)(b)(c) of Fertilizer (Control) Order
1985.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the products are bio-friendly and protecting
the crops from various viral and bacterial infections. Since
the bio products are not included in the schedule of the
Insecticides Act, 1968 or any other Act, including Fertilizer
Control Order, 1985, the question of taking any licence or
permission from any authorities does not arise. In
accordance with the order of this Court in W.P.No.25293
of 2014, the petitioner was submitting information about
bio products manufactured by him vide letter dated
26.11.2017. He further submits that this Court in the
above Writ Petition has given certain directions in cases of
bio products. The 2nd respondent has violated the
directions in the writ petition and raided the premises of
the petitioner. However, after alleged seizure, show-cause
notice dated 15.02.2021 was sent stating that two
samples namely Shine and Pink Killer contains pesticide
residue and sought explanation of this petitioner. There is
no evidence of seizure of such products and for the reason
of there being violation of the guidelines of this Court in
the Writ Petition, the criminal proceedings cannot be
continued.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the
2nd respondent would submit that all the guidelines issued
by the Commissioner of Agriculture and also the
directions of this Court in W.P.No.25293 of 2014 have not
been followed and there is violation of the provision of IPC
and Fertilizer (Control) Order, for which reason,
proceedings have to be continued against the petitioner.
6. The record reveals that the complainant is Zonal
Agricultural Officer, Waddepally Mandal. She along with
Vigilance and Enforcement Officers, Agricultural
Department Officers as a team conducted inspections on
17.02.2020. The team found that this petitioner and
others were manufacturing and storing fertilizer,
pesticides and other raw material without labels. It was
also found that the said fertilizer/medicines/pesticides
were being manufactured. Accordingly, the said fertilizers
and pesticides and raw material were taken into custody
by preparing panchanama. Thereafter, on 20.02.2020, i.e.,
three days after the alleged inspection and seizure,
complaint was lodged with the Inspector of Police,
P.S.Shanthinagar, Jogulamba Gadwal District. The said
compliant was registered by the Inspector of Police of the
police station for the offences under Sections 420, 120(B),
482 of IPC & Sections 12, 13(1)(a)(b)(c) of Fertilizer
(Control) Order, 1985.
7. The Inspector of Police considering the seizure and
raw material and other pesticides, conducted investigation
and concluded that the material seized was not of
standard quality on the basis of analysis report by the
FSL.
8. The provisions of Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985
deals with the price, control, distribution of fertilizer. The
violations according to the Investigating Officer are under
Clauses 12, 13(1)(a)(b)(c) of Fertilizer (Control) Order,
1985. For the sake of convenience, the said clauses are
extracted hereunder:
"12. Restriction on preparation of mixtures of fertilizer
No person shall carry on the business of preparing any
mixture of fertilisers. or special mixture of fertilizers, Bio-
fertilizers or Organic fertilisers except under and in
accordance with the terms and conditions of a certificate of
manufacture granted to him under clauses 15 or 16.
13. Standards of mixtures of Fertilisers
(1) Subject to the other provisions of the order-
(a) no person shall manufacture any mixture of fertilisers whether of
solid or liquid fertilizers specified in Part A of schedule I unless
such mixture conforms to the standards set out in the notification
to be issued by the Central Government in the Official Gazette;
(b) no person shall manufacture any Biofertiliser unless such
Biofertiliser conforms to the standards set out in the part A of
Schedule - III.
(c ) no person shall manufacture any Organic fertilizer unless such
organic fertilizer conforms to the standards set out in the part A of
Schedule IV."
9. According to the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985
under Chapter VII-Enforcement authorities, Clause 26
and 26-A, the State Government shall appoint Registering
Authorities for the purpose of Order and also prescribed
the limits of the local area within which each of such
registering authority shall exercise jurisdiction. Under
Clause 27, the State Government or the Central
Government by notification in the official Gazette appoint
number of such persons as it thinks fit necessary to be
Inspectors for the purpose of the Order and may define the
local limits within which such Inspector shall exercise his
jurisdiction. Further, Clauses 27-A and 27B prescribe the
qualifications for the appointment of fertilizer Inspectors
under the Order.
10. Clause 28 empowers such Inspectors for the purpose
of securing compliance with the Fertilizer (Control) Order,
1985. Inspector can seek information from any
manufacturer, importer, agency, wholesaler etc. He is
also empowered to draw samples of any fertilizer in
accordance with the procedure for drawal of samples in
schedule II of the order. The bio fertilizer and organic
fertilizer samples can be drawn in accordance with
Schedule III and IV respectively. Under Clause 28(c) such
Inspector can enter and search any premises where the
fertilizer is manufactured or sold and seize under clause
(d). Also seize any books of accounts relating to such
search of fertilizer under clause 28 (e).
11. The powers to conduct any such inspection, search
and consequently draw samples for the purpose of
examination can only be done by an Inspector who has
been notified and appointed by the State or Central
Government. Unless the person is notified under the
Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985, the question of
conducting search or seizure in respect of fertilizer, or bio
fertilizer does not arise.
12. The complainant J.Radha, is the person who
conducted inspection, search and seizure of the bio
material and other products in the premises of the
accused along with the officers of the Agricultural
Department, Vigilance Enforcement Officers. The said
Vigilance Enforcement officers or the Agricultural
Department Officers are not examined during the course
of investigation by the police nor cited in the list of
witnesses filed along with the charge sheet. The
complainant is not a notified Inspector appointed
specifically by the State or Central Government in the
limits where the search and seizure has taken place. In
the absence of any notification appointing the complainant
as an Inspector for the said area, such inspection, search
and seizure is illegal. It is not the case that the other
members of the team either from the Agricultural
Department or the other Vigilance Enforcement Officers
were in any manner notified as an Inspector under the
Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985. The search, inspection
and seizure are in violation of the Fertilizer (Control)
Order, 1985, as it is without authorization. For the said
reason of the illegality in search, inspection and drawl of
samples without authority, this Court deems it
appropriate to quash the proceedings against the
petitioner as the inspection and seizure are in violation of
the clauses of Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985.
13. In the result, the proceedings against the
petitioner/A1 in C.C.No.415 of 2021 on the file of Judicial
Magistrate of First Class at Mahabubnagar, are hereby
quashed.
14. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,
shall stand disposed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 21.03.2023
Note: LR copy to be marked.
B/o.kvs
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3117 of 2022
Dated: 21.03.2023
kvs
