- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200738 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MAHESH NAIK S/O VIJAY S. NAIK AGED 48 YEARS, OCC.MANAGER ZUARI AGRO CHEMICALS LTD. JAI KISAN BHAVAN ZUARI NAGAR, GOA – 403726 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH SHIVANNA, ADV.) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE JEWARGI, REP. BY ADDL. SPP Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH – 585 107 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABBUDIN, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION482 OF CR.P.C., (OLD) UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNNS (NEW), PRAYING TO EXERCISE INHERENT POWERS UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, EXAMINE THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.229/2022 (PRIVATE COMPLAINT NO. 13/2021) FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 19(i)(a) OF FERTILIZER CONTROL ORDER 1985 AND 7(i)(a)(ii)(d) OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955 PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT JEWARGI, AGAINST THE PETITIONER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 09.06.2025 AT KALABURAGI BENCH AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER, BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 CAV ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner/accused No.2 is before this Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C No.229/2022 filed by the respondent, wherein the learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 19(i)(a) of Fertilizer Control Order, 1985 and Sections 7(i)(a) ii(d) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC at Jewargi. Factual matrix of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 22.05.2015, the complainant had visited the shop of accused No.1, namely, M/s.Jogur Trading Company situated at Jeratagi. The fertilizer, namely, 19:19:19 N:P:K complex was sold. The respondent took samples from the stitched two bags out of 195 bags. He found that the date of expiry and batch number was not printed on the bags. The respondent, after having taken the samples, sent those samples to the concerned laboratory to get the report from the competent authority. After having received the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 report from the competent authority, the complainant filed a complaint stating that accused No.2 was selling the Fertilizer, which is considered as ‘non-standard’. The Trial Court took cognizance and criminal case has been registered against accused and summons was issued. Hence, this petition. 3. Heard Sri.Manjunath Shivanna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State. 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the order of taking cognizance by the learned Magistrate is contrary to the provisions of the Act under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act. Admittedly, the averments of the complaint would indicate that the company of accused No.2 was manufacturing non- standard fertilizer of which accused No.1 was selling it to the farmers. According to respondent, it is non- standard fertilizers. Under such circumstances, to initiate a criminal case against the accused, company must be made as one of the necessary accused which is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 mandatory under section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act. Not making the company as one of the accused to the proceedings would be held to be illegal and the proceedings has to be vitiated. As such, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent - State vehemently submitted that accused No.2, being a Manager of the company was authorised to receive on behalf of the company. The complaint cannot be quashed on the ground of technicalities. 6. It is further submitted that, the petitioners were selling the fertilizers to the farmers which is of sub – standard quality. Hence, the petitioners are required to face the trial. At this stage, if the petition is allowed hardship would be caused to the public at large, hence, the petition is to be rejected. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader pray to dismiss the petition. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the order of taking cognizance, it - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 is relevant to take note of Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, which read as under: “10. Offences by companies.―(1) If the person contravening an order made under section 3 is a company, every person who, at the time the contravention was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly: Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to any punishment if he proves that the contravention took place without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent such contravention. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Explanation.― For the purposes of this section,― (a) “company” means any body corporate, and includes a firm or other association of individuals; and (b) “director” in relation to a firm means a partner in the firm. [10A. Offences to be cognizable.― Notwithstanding anything contained in [the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)] every offence punishable under this Act shall be “cognizable. [10B. Power of court to publish name, place of business, etc., of companies convicted under the Act.―(1) Where any company is convicted under this Act, it shall be competent for the court convicting the company to cause the name and place of business of the company, nature of the contravention, the fact that the company has been so convicted and such other particulars as the court may consider to be appropriate in the circumstances of the case, to be published at - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 the expense of the company in such newspapers or in such other manner as the court may direct. (2) No publication under sub-section (1) shall be made until the period for preferring an appeal against the orders of the court has expired without any appeal having been preferred, or such an appeal, having been preferred, has been disposed of. (3) The expenses of any publication under subsection (1) shall be recoverable from the company as if it were a fine imposed by the court. Explanation.― For the purposes of this section, “company” has the meaning assigned to it in clause (a) of the Explanation of section 10.] 10C. Presumption of culpable mental state.―(1) In any prosecution for any offence under this Act which requires a culpable mental state on the part of the accused, the court shall presume the existence of such mental state but it shall be a defence for the accused to prove the fact that he had no such mental state with respect to the act charged as an offence in that prosecution. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 Explanation.― In this section, “culpable mental state” includes intention, motive, knowledge of a fact and the belief in, or reason to believe, a fact. (2) For the purposes of this section, a fact is said to be proved only when the court believes it to exist beyond reasonable doubt and not merely when its existence is established by a preponderance of probability.]” 8. Having read the above said provision, it makes it clear that to sue against the company in respect of an offence committed, the company is necessary to be one of the accused. Having not made the company as one of the accused, certainly, would vitiate the proceedings. 9. In the present case, it appears from the complaint that the complainant had made accused Nos.1 and 2 who are the dealer and representative of the company, however, the company is not made as one of the independent accused, which is required to be made as per law. Therefore, the order of taking cognizance has to be set aside. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5881 CRL.P No. 200738 of 2025 10. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The entire proceedings in C.C No.229/2022 pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC at Jewargi, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE UN List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1