APHC010438452023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6568/2023 Between: T. Sukumar and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND Sri E Ramesh Reddy and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. HARANADHA RAJU KATTA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 2 APHC010068522024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 825/2024 Between: Smt.terli Sunitha and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. HARANADHA RAJU KATTA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 3 The Court made the following Common Order: 1. In Criminal Petition No.6568 of 2023, the petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.418 of 2022, on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class-Civil Judge-Cum- Special Court for Fertilizer Control Act, Chittoor. 2. In Criminal Petition No.825 of 2024, the petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 in C.C.No.708 of 2023, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Vizianagaram. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are charged with committing the alleged offences under Section 19(a) and (b) of the Fertilizer (Control) order, 1985, read with Section 7(i)a(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 4. It is submitted that in Criminal Petition No.6568 of 2023, the 1st petitioner is shown as a dealer of M/s.Navayuga Fertilizers and Company, and the 2nd petitioner is shown as Manager and Person Responsible of M/s.Greenstar Fertilizers Limited. In Criminal Petition No.825 of 2023, the 1st petitioner is shown as dealer of the business of Fertilizers and a dealer of 2nd petitioner, the 2nd petitioner is doing wholesale dealer in Fertilizers and distributor of HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 4 M/s.Greenstar Fertilizers Limited, and the 3rd petitioner is an employee of M/s.Greenstar Fertilizers Limited, Vijayawada. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are only employees of the respective companies, and the samples of the seeds manufactured by the respective companies were drawn for testing. Upon receipt of the report of the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Fertilizer Proving Center, the samples were found to be non-standard. On the strength of the said report, the 1st respondent has filed the complaint before the Court. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that without arraigning the company as an accused, the employees of the company cannot be vicariously liable for the commission of the alleged offences. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court for the State of Karnataka in W.P.No.15071 of 2023. The initiation of criminal prosecution for alleged offences under the Fertilizer Control Order and the Essential Commodities Act was considered by the Karnataka High Court. In that case, the manufacturer of the subject fertilizer was HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 5 not arraigned as an accused, and it was held that without arraigning the company, the petitioners cannot be held vicariously liable. On these grounds, the writ petition was allowed, and the proceedings before the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class were quashed. 8. A similar view was taken by the Karnataka High Court in the matter of Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited vs. State of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.101492 of 2022. 9. The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar, in Crl.M.Nos.496 of 2021 and 878 of 2021, has taken a similar view. In those cases, the petitioners were shown as officers of the company and were shown as accused. Admittedly, the petitioners are not the manufactures of the seeds whose sample were drawn by the respondent No.1 authority for the purpose of testing. Without arraigning the manufacturing of the seeds, the criminal liability cannot fastened on the employees of the company. 10. Considering the submissions, this Court, it in its considered opinion, following the judgments of the High Court for the State of Karnataka, holds that the prosecution lodged by the 1st respondent cannot withstand the scrutiny of law. HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 6 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petitions are allowed. C.C.No.418 of 2022, on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class- Civil Judge-Cum-Special Court for Fertilizer Control Act, Chittoor and C.C.No.708 of 2023, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Vizianagaram, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 19.03.2025 NKA HN, J Crl.P.Nos.6568_2023 and 825_2024 7 259 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6568 of 2023 and 825 of 2024 Date: 19.03.2025 NKA