- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1244 CRL.P No. 103657 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103657 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. HANAMANT SHANKREPPA LOGANVI AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SHRI KUMARESHWAR AGRO KENDRA GALAGALI, TALUK. BILAGI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 2. BASAVARAJ RUDRAPPA GIRENNAVAR AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. CRIYAGEN AGRI AND BIOTECH PVT., LTD., 14TH NH-13, VIJAYAPUR-SOLAPUR, HIGHWAY, VIJAYAPUR-586119. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY FERTILIZER INSPECTOR, CUM AGRICULTURE OFFICER, O/O ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, TALUK BILAGI-587101. 2. SADASHIV B. HALLALLI AGE. 52 YEARS, ALSO REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.341/2021 PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BILAGI BAGALKOT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER CLAUSE 19 OF FERTILIZER (CONTROL) ORDER 1985 AND B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.25 11:20:51 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1244 CRL.P No. 103657 of 2024 SECTION 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 2/PETITIONER NO.1 TO 2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The respondent filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, alleging that accused No.1 is the owner and person in charge of the firm for the conduct of its business. The firm is engaged in the business of fertilizers and organic manures and holds a retailer’s license for selling fertilizers and organic manures. Accused No.2 is the Managing Director of a private limited company that manufactures and markets organic manure. 2. During an inspection of the premises of accused No.1, the complainant drew a sample of organic manure from the stock and sent it to the Fertilizer Analyst for examination. The Fertilizer Analyst, upon analysis, submitted a report indicating that the organic manure was of substandard quality. Consequently, the complainant issued a notice to accused No.1, along with a copy of the Fertilizer Analyst’s report. 3. Accused No.1 requested that the sample be re- analyzed. The Laboratory In-charge, Regional Center of Organic Farming, confirmed in a subsequent report that the organic manure in question was of substandard quality. Based on this, it was - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1244 CRL.P No. 103657 of 2024 alleged that accused No.1 committed an offence under Clause 19 of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985, and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 4. The manufacturer of the organic manure is a private limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, which has also been named in the complaint. The issue for consideration in this case is whether the prosecution can proceed against the retailer when the company itself has not been arraigned as an accused. 5. Section 2 of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985, defines relevant terms and links the provisions of the Control Order to the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 6. Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, deals with offences committed by companies. It states 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 this case, the company, which manufactured the organic manure, has not been arraigned as an accused. Accused No.1 is the retailer, and accused No.2 is the Managing Director of the company. Neither can be held vicariously liable under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, without the company being made a party to the proceedings. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1244 CRL.P No. 103657 of 2024 8. A similar issue was considered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.102568/2022 (DD 14.09.2022), wherein it was held that when the company is not arraigned as an accused, the complaint is not maintainable against the retailer or the Managing Director. Therefore, in such circumstances, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. 9. In light of the above, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.341/2021 pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Bilagi Bagalkot, insofar as it relates to the petitioners – accused No.1 and 2 stands quashed. Pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25