Judgment

D.P. Wadhwa, J.-Leave granted.

2. In these appeals, raising a common question of law, the State has challenged the three separate judgments of Punjab and Haryana High Court queshing the complaints filed under Section 29(1)(a) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (for short, the ‘Act’). High Court exercised its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the ‘Code’) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Section 29 of the Act provides for offences and punishment. Under clasuse (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 29 whoever imports, manufac­tures, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes any insecti­cide deemed to be misbranded under sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (viii) of clause (k) of Section 3 of the Act shall be punishable for the first offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both; and for the second and a subsequent offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

3. To understand the rival contentions, we refer to the facts in the case in the appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.)