AJEET SEEDS LTD. THROUGH MANOHAR TRIMBAKRAO PATHRIKAR MANAGER Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Ajeet Seeds Ltd. Through Manohar Trimbakrao Pathrikar Manager
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Click here to view full judgement.
PRAKASH D.NAIK,J. -
(1.) The applicants have invoked the inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 45 of 2005 pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopada, District Jalgaon.
(2.) The respondent has filed a criminal complaint on 5.4.2005 for an offence under Section 7(b) of the Seeds Act, 1966. The Court took cognizance of the said complaint and issued summons to the applicants.
(3.) The prosecution's case is as follows:
(a) The complainant is authorized to institute the prosecution for the breach of provisions laid down under the Seeds Act, 1966 and the Seeds Rules, 1968.
(b) The accused No. 1 is carrying business of selling and distribution of seeds and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are dealers. On 2.12.2003, the Seed Inspector visited the place of the accused No. 3 where the seed was being stocked. At that time Proprietor Mr. Bharatkumar Purushottamdas Potdar was present in the premises.
(c) The Seed Inspector submitted Form No. 6(VI) indicating his intention to take sample of seeds from the balance stock of Wheat, Lok1 with the other kind of seeds available in the godown as described in Form VIII. The sample of seed was taken from original sealed packet. The sample was randomly selected for germination and physical purity test. One sealed part was given to accused No. 3. The second sealed part was wrapped in a paper and after sealing, it was labelled for the purpose of sending it the the Seed Testing Lab, Pune for germination and physical purity analysis. On 18.12.2003, the second sealed packet was forwarded to the Seed Testing Lab, Pune. The third sealed sample is retained in the office as counter sample.
(d) On 20.1.2004, the Seed Inspector received the report dated 16.1.2004 from Seed Testing Lab, Pune. It is alleged that the sample was found to be nonstandard i.e. according to the prescribed standards as per the Seeds Act, 1966. The Inspector issued show cause notice to accused No. 3 on 28.1.2004. The reply was given by accused No. 3 on 16.2.2004. Since the reply was satisfactory, the Seed Inspector original Complainant approached the Court and filed the subject complaint under Section 7(b) of the Seeds Act, 1966. The accused No. 1 produced, distributed and sold the seed lot which is nonstandard i.e. of prescribed standard, thus, contravening Section 7(b) of Act. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 have stocked, distributed and sold the nonstandard seed to dealers and farmers.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.