P.N.Bakshi, J. - (1.) These are two connected references. Sri Vishnu Dutta Shukla, Food Inspector, inspected the premises of Allahabad Milling Co. Ltd. Lukerganj, Allahabad on 20-8-78. He has alleged to have found Sri Prem Chandra Jaiswal storing mustard seeds for sale in the premises of the Mill. He purchased a sample of mustard seeds and sent it for analysis. The report of the Public Analyst disclosed that the sample contained extraneous matter in excess of the prescribed limit of 7 per cent. Sri Ravi Verma, Magistrate took cognizance of the offence. The case was subsequently transferred under order of the District Magistrate to Sri Nageshwar Prasad Singh. Notice was issued to the accused. Aggrieved thereby one revision was filed by Sri Prem Chand, the alleged seller, and the other revision by the Manager and the Director of the Firm. Both these revisions were heard together by the Sessions Judge, Allahabad, who has recommended that the order of the Magistrate issuing summons be quashed, and further directions be given for considering whether there was sufficient ground for proceeding against these accused and also for impleading the company as the party to the proceeding.
(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the impugned order. Two main defects have been pointed out in the referring order, one is that Shri Ravi Verma who had taken cognizance of the offence, initially was himself a member of the raiding party. Being an interested person, he had no jurisdiction to take cognizance. The second ground is that the Company was a necessary party to the prosecution and it has not been impleaded. Thirdly it has been pointed out that the co-accused, who were the Managing Director and Director of the Company could only be prosecuted, if they were incharge or had directed supervision and management of the business of the firm. In my opinion, all these three grounds are good grounds for making a reference.
(3.) I have carefully perused the complaint, which was filed as for back as 8th November, 73. I do not find any allegation herein whether the accused apart from Shri Prem Chandra Jaiswal were persons, who were incharge of or responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company, or whether the offence in question was committed with the consent connivance of these officers. I also find that the Company has not been impleaded as a party. The Sessions Judge, Allahabad has in fact recommended the removal of the infirmities in the complaint after quashing the order of the Magistrate issuing process. I do not think such an action would be justified in the interest of justice, particularly when a long period of six years has already elapsed, since the offence is alleged to have been committed. The order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance was an illegal order. The failure of the complainant to implead the company is the vital defect. The allegations against the other co-accused are wanting requisite particulars. In these circumstances, I consider that while the recommendation of the Sessions Judge for quashing the order of the Magistrate should be accepted, the entire proceedings under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act should be quashed.;