- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200702 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SUMITOMO CHEMICAL INDIA, MANAGING DIRECTOR, BUILDING NO.1, GROUND FLOOR, SHANT MANOR CO-OP HSG. SOCIETY, CHAKRAVARTI ASHOK X ROAD, KANDIVALI (EAST), MUMBAI – 400101, MAHARASHTRA. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI J. BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THROUGH THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, FARMER LIAISON CENTER, MANAGULI AND PESTICIDE INSPECTOR, TALUK BASAVANA BAGEWADI, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI – 585103. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION, QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPLAINT DATED 07.09.2023 IN Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 P.C.R.NO.16/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE AND ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS DATED 15.09.2023 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., BASAVANA BAGEWADI, VIJAYAPURA DIST., FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3(K), 17, 18 AND 29(1) OF INSECTICIDE ACT, 1968 IN C.C. NO.1660/2023 AND PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO AS PER ANNEXURE-B, INSOFAR AS IT RELATED TO PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.1. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 26.04.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CAV ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) This petition is arising out of a private complaint dated 07.09.2023 in P.C.R.No.16/2023 and order of taking cognizance and issuance of summons dated 15.09.2023, passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Basavana Bagewadi, Vijayapur District, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(k), 17, 18 and 29(1) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 in C.C.No.1660/2023 and the proceedings pursuant thereto insofar as the petitioner/accused No.1 is concerned. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 2. Factual matrix of the case are as under: The respondent filed a private complaint on 07.09.2023 stating that he conducted an inspection on 21.11.2021 at M/s Basaveshwara Agro Enterprises situated in the Main Road, Managuli. He found that some pesticides were being sold in the said store, which were not registered under the CIB. Therefore, he collected the samples and one of the samples was sent to Laboratory for Chemical Analysis. After having received the report, a complaint came to be registered against accused Nos.1 to 3. 3. The Trial Court after taking cognizance, issued summons to the petitioner and others. 4. Heard Sri J. Basavaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the order of taking cognizance against - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 the petitioners is bad in law for the reason that the respondent had violated Section 24(4) of the Insecticide Act, 1968. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that non-furnishing the details or samples or report for the purpose of sending the same to the laboratory to rebut the report submitted by the respondent is only an irregularity and that may be cured even at the later stage. Having said thus, learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject the petition. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, before adverting to the merit of the case, it is relevant to refer the provisions under Section 24(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968, which reads as under: “24. Report of Insecticide Analyst- (4) Unless the sample has already been tested or analysed in the Central Insecticides - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 Laboratory, where a person has under sub- section (3) notified his intention of adducing evidence in controversion of the Insecticide Analyst's report, the Court may, of its own motion or in its discretion at the request either of the complainant or of the accused, cause the sample of the insecticide produced before the Magistrate under sub-section (6) of section 22 to be sent for test or analysis to the said laboratory [which shall, within a period of thirty days, which shall make the test or analysis] and report in writing signed by, or under the authority of, the Director of the Central Insecticides Laboratory the result thereof, and such report shall be conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein. 8. On reading of the above said provisions, it makes clear that, unless, the sample has already been tested or analyzed in the Central Insecticides Laboratory, where a person has under sub-section (3) notified his intention of adducing evidence in controversion of the report of the Insecticide Analyst’s, the Court may, of its own motion or in its discretion at the request either of the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 complainant or of the accused, cause the sample of the insecticide produced before the Magistrate under sub- section (6) of section 22 to be sent for test. 9. The said submission does not give any yield to the petitioner for the reason that the petitioner herein has not made any application to seek the sample to send the same to the Central Insecticides Laboratory or any other Laboratory to controvert the report. 10. Be that as it may, on reading of the complaint, it is stated that accused Nos.1 and 2 were manufacturing the pesticides in the name of the Agro products, which were not registered under the CIB. However, the complainant made managing directors of the companies as accused Nos.1 and 2 in the complaint without arraying the companies as the accused, it is needless to say that whenever the complainant wants to file a criminal complaint against the company for having manufactured the insecticides or pesticides which are contrary to the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 provisions of the Insecticides Act, the company can also be made as one of the accused. 11. In the present complaint, the companies where the insecticides were manufacturing have not been made as accused. The same would amount to illegality. Therefore, the complaint against the petitioner does not survive. Hence, it is appropriate to quash the proceedings. 12. In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The Private Complaint dated 07.09.2023 in P.C.R.No.16/2023 and order of taking cognizance and issuance of summons dated 15.09.2023, passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Basavana Bagewadi, Vijayapur District, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(k), 17, 18 and - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2584 CRL.P No. 200702 of 2025 29(1) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 in C.C.No.1660/2023 and proceedings pursuant thereto insofar as the petitioner/accused No.1 is concerned, are quashed. In view of disposal of the petition, interim application, if any, stands disposed off. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 Ct: PK