- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200367 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. NAGANNAGOUDA S PATIL S/O SHIVSHARANAPPA GOUDA, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: PROPRIETOR M/S DANDANGUNDA BASAVESHWAR AGRO AGENCIES, JEWARGI. R/O. H.NO 10-2/107B, SB TEMPLE ROAD, SANGAMESHWAR COLONY, KALABURAGI-585103. 2. BASAVARAJ VANIKYAL S/O SIDDAPPA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: MANAGER, COROMANDAL INTERNATIONAL LTD, CORMANDALA HOUSE SARDAR PATEL ROAD SECUNDRABAD. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI AVINASH A. UPLAONKAR AND SRI RAVI K. ANOOR, ADVOCATES) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FERTILIZER INSPECTOR CUM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE JEWARGI, NOW REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585107 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP) Digitally signed by SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 528 OF BNSS PRAYING TO EXERCISE INHERENT POWERS U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS, EXAMINE THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 1500/2022 (PRIVATE COMPLAINT NO.12/2021), FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 19(i) (a) OF FERTILIZER CONTROL ORDER 1985 AND SEC 7(a) (I) AND (ii) OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955, PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT AT JEWARGI, AGAINST THE PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) Accused Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.1500/2022 pending before the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Jewargi for the offences punishable under Section 7(a)(I) and (ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 19(i)(a) of Fertilizer Control Order, 1985. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no compliance of Section 10 of the Essential - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 Commodities Act, 1955 and therefore, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offences. He submits that petitioner No.1 who is the owner of a retail shop has been prosecuted for the alleged offences, which is not permissible in view of the law laid by this Court in the case of Devanand and Another vs. State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No.200937/2024. 4. Learned High Court Government Pleader who has opposed the prayer made in the petition does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. Private complaint in the present case is filed by the respondent alleging that the product of a company known as Coramandel International Limited, which was found to be of sub-standard quality was seized from the retail shop of petitioner No.1 and it is in this background, complaint was filed as against petitioner No.1, who is the owner of a retail shop and petitioner No.2 who is the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 manager of the company, which has manufactured the product. 6. Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, reads as follows: “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 sub- section (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, secretary or other officer shall also be - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 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.” 7. Since the company which has manufactured the product has not been arrayed as an accused in the impugned criminal proceedings, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offences in the absence of the company. In addition to the same, petitioner No.1, who is the owner of a retail shop from which the product of the company which was found to be of sub-standard quality was seized cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offences in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Devanand (supra), disposed off on 01.02.2025. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1304 CRL.P No. 200367 of 2025 8. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that impugned criminal proceedings as against the petitioners cannot be continued. Accordingly, following: ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.1500/2022, pending before the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Jewargi for the offences punishable under Section 7(a)(I) and (ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 19(i)(a) of Fertilizer Control Order, 1985, as against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 stands quashed. In view of disposal of main petition, pending application, if any, does not survive for consideration and accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SRT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59 CT:PK