AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioners are the accused in CC.887/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court, Muvattupuzha for the offences punishable under
Sections 24, 25, 33 and 40 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009.
Petitioners are conducting an institution where manufacture of dental implants is being carried out. They are maintaining the business in the form
of a pre-clinic ''with a dental chair and other sophisticated equipments including scanner etc. Dental surgeons used to go over there with their
patients in complicated cases and used to take measurements for the manufacture of the dental implant and molds. For manufacturing dental
implants and molds, an imported powder is made use of. The said powder is not being sold by the petitioners. Even the Legal Metrology
Department has no case that the petitioners are engaged in the sale of the said raw materials for the manufacture of dental implants or molds.
Dental implants or molds cannot be generally created for everyone in the same size. It varies from person to person in accordance with the oral
measurement of the gum.
In fact, there is no sale within the meaning of Section 2(r) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 at the said pre-clinic; whereas, they are fabricating
dental implants and molds, after taking measurements of the patients coming over there or as per the orders being placed by the Dental Surgeons.
Therefore, the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 has, in fact, no application to the business being carried on at the premises of the petitioners. The
officers of the Legal Metrology Department came over there at the institution allegedly for a surprise check. It is alleged that their inspection was
obstructed. It has to be noted that they had visited the premises without wearing uniform even though the government has strictly instructed through
two circulars that the officers should wear uniform while conducting the inspection or search. As per of the circulars, it has been made clear that the
search, if conducted by an officer without wearing uniform, has no legal sanctity.
By alleging that the petitioners had obstructed the search and inspection of the officers of the Legal Metrology Department, initially a complaint
was preferred by them to the police, which culminated in Crime No.1423/2013 of the Muvattupuzha Police Station for the offences under Sections
353, 294(b) and 506(i) IPC. The said crime was quashed by this Court through Annexure-A4 order.
As and when they failed in the said attempt, after two years, they filed Annexure-A1 complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s
Court, Muvattupuzha on 19.09.2015, alleging the aforesaid offences. This is a case wherein the petitioners are not conducting any sales of any
goods which can be measured or weighed. Any weighing balance is not required for their business. At the same time, if at all any weighing balance
is there, it is for the purpose of taking fresh raw materials for fabricating the molds. Even if the mold is being sold, one cannot say that it should
have a particular weight or it should be measured. When there is no sales of goods which have to be measured or weighed, the offences alleged
against the petitioners are not legally sustainable.
Regarding Section 40 of the Act, once again the allegation that the petitioners had obstructed the search was forwarded by the complainant
when they had failed in their earlier attempt to get the petitioners prosecuted through the police case. When the very same charge under Section
353 IPC was quashed by this Court, the offence under Section 40 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 is also not legally sustainable. It is evident
that the officers had made a vexatious search. The photographs produced by the petitioners clearly reveal that the officers were not in uniform.
They have violated the circulars issued by the government in this regard.
Whatever it is, any of the offences levelled against the petitioners through Annexure-A1 complaint is not legally sustainable. Annexure-A1 is
therefore, liable to be quashed. Matters being so, all further proceedings in CC.887/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court,
Muvattupuzha, can be quashed.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A1 and all further proceedings as against the petitioners in CC.887/2015 of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate''s Court, Muvattupuzha, are quashed.