1 / 4 63-apl-1247-25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO. 1247 OF 2025 Vijayrao B Patil Vs.The District Quality Control, Yavatmal and others ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.R.D.Dhande,counsel for the applicant. Mr.Anant Ghogare,APP for the State. CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATE : 05/12/2025 1. The applicant has filed this criminal application for quashing and stetting aside the complaint filed by the non applicant No.1 pending before the 7th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yavatmal bearing Regular Criminal Case No.644 of 2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 3,7(i)(a)(ii) and 12 A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, r/w Clause 19(i)(a) of the Fertilizer Control Order,1985 on the ground that the complaint is not maintainable. 2. The non-applicant no.1 has filed a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class alleging that Datta Fertilizer and Chemical Private Limited is the manufacturer of the fertilizer i.e. Granulate. Datta fertilizer Kavita 2025:BHC-NAG:13758 2 / 4 63-apl-1247-25 and Chemical Pvt. Ltd distributed the fertiliser to the M/s Deepak Fertilisers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. to market the said fertilizer which in turn was sold to Agro Service Centre being the retail outlet located in Pandarkawda Yavatmal. It is alleged that the non-applicant No.1 i.e. Quality Control Inspector, Yavatmal visited Agro Service Centre being the retail outlet located in Pandarkawda Yavatmal and found various types of fertilizers were kept for sale. Three samples were sealed in the presence of the non-applicant No.3 and sent to the incharge Fertiliser Quality Control Laboratory, Amravati. Said Fertiliser sample was non-standard. In view of the said alleged analysis report it was held by the non-applicant No.1 that Datta Fertilizer and Chemical Pvt. Ltd manufactured fertilizers of sub-standard quality which were distributed to M/s. Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. which was further distributed to Agro Service Centre being the retail outlet located in Pandharkawada Yavatmal. 3. Show cause notices were issued to non-applicant Nos.2 and 3. Only on 25.11.2008 show cause was issued to the Applicant. The show cause notice was belatedly issued to the Applicant. Further advances the case that the non- applicant No.1 / Complainant did not intend to initiate any action qua the Applicant. Kavita 3 / 4 63-apl-1247-25 The Applicant and the non-applicant No.3 filed their respective replies to show cause notice. 4. As the respondent found said replies unsatisfactory, has filed private complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrare. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant has stated that since last 17 years the case is pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court. The complainant has not made party to the Company. He has relied on the judgment in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Anilkumar Jinabhai Patel and anr reported in 2010 (SCC OnLine Bom 2324, in support of his argument that in a complaint under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, the Company is necessary party. The Company is not made a party, He has also relied on the judgment in the case of The State of Madras Vs.P C.V. Parekh and anr. reported in AIR 1971 SCC 447, and in the case of Aneeta Hada Vs. Godfather Travles and Tours Private Limited and tours private limited and with other connected matters, reported in (2012) 5 SCC 661, wherein it is observed that Company could have been made liable for prosecution without being impleaded as an accused and whether the Directors could have been prosecuted for offences punishable under the aforesaid provisions without the Company being arrayed as an accused. 5. It is further observed that the first condition is that the Company should be held to be liable; a charge has Kavita 4 / 4 63-apl-1247-25 to be framed; a finding has to be recorded, and the liability of the persons in charge of the Company only arises when the contravention is by the Company itself. 6. After hearing both the parties, it appears from the record that the Company was not made a party. The accused no.1, in the said complaint is no more. As per the bailiffs report. The matter is pending since, 2008, and as per the legal position, the Company is the necessary party in the said complaint, the application is allowed as per prayer clause (a) of the application. 7. The complaint pending before the 7th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yavatmal bearing Regular Criminal Case No.644 of 2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 3,7(i)(a)(ii) and 12 A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, r/w Clause 19(i)(a) of the Fertilizer Control Order,1985 is hereby quashed and set aside. 8. The Criminal Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Kavita