Narinder Singh vs Chemico Pesticide Combines

K.K. Srivastava, J.

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned DAG for the State of Punjab. The petitioners seek the quashing of the impugned complaint filed under the Insecticides Act, 1968 read with Rules, 1971 (copy Annexure P1) and the summoning order (Annexure P2) on the ground inter alia that the sanction order passed by the competent authority was not a valid and legal sanction. It has been contended that the same sanction order was considered by the learned Single Judge of this Court Dr. Sarojnei Saksena, J. (as then she was) in order dated 25.4.1997 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 21850M of 1996 filed by the dealers Rajinder Singh and two others. The relevant discussion is to be found in para 15 of the judgment which runs as under :

"Secondly, even the sanction order Annexure P4 is not in accordance with law. It does not contain names of the petitioners and facts which constitute the offence with which the accused are proposed to be charged. There is no mention in this sanction order as to who took the sample, from whom it was taken, what was the report of the Analyst and how the sample was found misbranded. Further, it is on a cyclostyled form. All these facts taken together only show nonapplication of mind by the Sanctioning Authority. Hence in my considered view, sanction order Annexure P4 is not valid. On this count also the complaint Annexure P1 is liable to be quashed qua the petitioners."

In the reply, it is not disputed that the order of sanction for the petitioners of this case or the manufacturers is the same as the one which has been held to be invalid in the case filed by the dealers of this case. Since the order of sanction has been found to be bad in law and sufficient for quashing of the impugned complaint and summoning order, this petition should also succeed on the same ground as being raised on a sanction order which is not legal and proper as already held in Criminal Misc. No. 21850M of 1996. Resultantly, this petition succeeds as the facts of this case are squarely covered so far as this sanction is concerned with the case of the dealers involved in criminal Misc. No. 21850M of 1996 Rajinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab. This petition is allowed and the impugned complaint and the order of summoning (copy Annexure P1 and P2) and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are set aside qua the petitioners.