IMPORTANT POINT
The liability of officers of a company for offences under the Legal Metrology Act is contingent on their direct involvement or responsibility as specified in section 49, and established legal precedents can influence the court's decision to quash criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A.K.Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, the learned counsel for the respondent State.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Weigh and Measurement Case No.11 of 2013 including order dated 20.8.2013 whereby learned counsel has taken cognizance under section 25 of Legal Metrology Act, 2009, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat.

The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that in the electronic weighbridge of S.D.Q.III Project Officer S.D.Q 3 Project Kalyani Torio of C.C. L. an inspection was conducted by department and it was found that verification certificate and test weights were not found there and it was further stated that an error was found in weighbridge as a result of which prosecution was launched.

4. Mr. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the officer of the Central Coalfields Limited and was posted as General Manager, Dhori Area, Bermo, Bokaro. He submits that for weighing coal which are being dispatched by electronics weighbridge is installed and the weighbridge belong to central coalfields limited under section 617 of Companies Act. He submits that for verification certificate has been issued by the Inspector Legal Metrology Department, Bermo at Tenughat. He submits that learned court has taken cognizance under section 25 of the said Act in view of the provision made in section 49 of the said Act and accordingly the company has not been made accused and there is no averment that the petitioner is looking into day to day affairs of the company. On this ground, he submits that the petition may kindly be quashed.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent State submits that there are allegations and the learned court has rightly taken congnizance.

6. In view of above submission the Court has gone through the contents of the complaint and finds that admittedly the case is lodged under section 25 of the said Act. Section 49 of the said Act speaks as under:-

“49. Offences by companies and power of Court to publish name, place of business, etc., for companies convicted.-(1) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company,-

(a)(i) the person, if any, who has been nominated under sub-section (2) to be in charge of, and responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company (hereinafter in this section referred to as a person responsible); or

(ii) where no person has been nominated, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company; and

(b) the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly:

Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to any punishment provided in this Act if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge and that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.

(2) Any company may, by order in writing, authorise any of its directors to exercise all such powers and take all such steps as may be necessary or expedient to prevent the commission by the company of any offence under this Act and may give notice to the Director or the concerned Controller or any legal metrology officer authorised in this behalf by such Controller (hereinafter in this section referred to as the authorised officer) in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, that it has nominated such director as the person responsible, along with the written consent of such director for being so nominated.

Explanation. Where a company has different establishments or branches or different units in any establishment or branch, different persons may be nominated under this sub-section in relation to different establishments or branches or units and the person no