- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:330 CRL.P No. 102948 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102948 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. RAVI KULLOLLI S/O. SHRILLAL SUKHBIR SINGH, AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. PROPRIETOR, REP. BY SHREE MAHANTESH ENTERPRISES, LOKAPUR-587122. 2. BALESHWAR PRASAD TOMAR @ B.P.TOMAR S/O. SHRILLAL SUKHBIR SINGH, AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. GENERAL MANAGER, HILIYOKAN AGRO CHEMICALS, BLOCK NO.221, INDUSTRIAL AREA, RAICHUR-584134. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AVINASH A. UPLAONKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE OFFICE AND FERTILIZER INSPECTOR AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE LOKAPUR, MUDHOL, R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 528 OF BNSS, SEEKING TO EXERCISE INHERENT POWERS U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., EXAMINE THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE TAKING COGNIZANCE IN CC NO.247/2023 (PRIVATE COMPLAINT NO.17/2023) DATED 18.07.2023, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/O 19 OF THE FERTILIZER (INORGANIC, ORGANIC OR MIXED (CONTROL) ORDER 1985 R/W 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955, PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT AT MUDHOL, AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2. Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.13 15:17:12 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:330 CRL.P No. 102948 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The cognizance taken of the offences punishable under Clause 19 of the Fertilizer (Inorganic, Organic, or Mixed) (Control) Order, 1985, read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, the `Act, 1955’), is impugned in this petition. 2. The complaint was filed by the respondent, alleging that they visited the shop of the petitioner – accused No.1, who is the owner of M/s. Mahantesh Enterprises, Lokapur. From the available stock of fertilizer 17:17:17, manufactured by Holiyokon Agro Chemicals Limited, Raichur, samples were seized and sent to the laboratory at Dharwad for analysis. The analysis report revealed that the fertilizer sample did not meet the prescribed standards and was of sub-standard quality, which is in contravention of Clause 19 of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent. 4. The petitioners are sought to be prosecuted on the basis that petitioner No.1 is the retailer of the fertilizer manufactured by Holiyokon Agro Chemicals Limited, and accused No.2 is the General Manager of the company. The analysis report indicated that the fertilizer manufactured by the company was of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:330 CRL.P No. 102948 of 2024 sub-standard quality, which is a violation of Clause 19 of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985. 5. Clause 2 of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985, states that the Act refers to the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 6. Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, addresses offences committed by companies. It stipulates that if the person contravening an order made under Section 3 is a company, then every person who, at the time of the contravention, was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company’s business, as well as the company itself, shall be deemed guilty of the contravention. 7. In the present case, the company that manufactured the fertilizer, Holiyokon Agro Chemicals Limited, has not been arraigned as an accused. Accused No.1 is the retailer, and accused No.2 is the General Manager of the company. However, without the company being made a party to the proceedings, neither the retailer nor the General Manager can be held vicariously liable under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 8. A similar issue was considered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.102568/2022 (DD 14.09.2022), where it was held that if the company is not arraigned as an accused, the complaint is not maintainable against the retailer or the General Manager. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:330 CRL.P No. 102948 of 2024 In light of the above, the prosecution against the petitioners is not sustainable. Therefore, in such circumstances, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.247/2023 pending on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Mudhol, insofar as it relates to the petitioners – accused Nos.1 and 2 is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24