The main legal point established in the judgment is that the period of limitation for filing a complaint under the Insecticides Act commences from the date of receipt of the analyst's report, and the delay in filing must be properly explained. Additionally, the liability of a marketing company for misbranding is contingent on the proper storage and sealing of the product.

JUDGMENT

Karamjit Singh, J. - The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complaint No.COMA/1/2018 dated 24.1.2018 under Sections 3(k)(i), 17, 18, 29 and 33 of Insecticides Act read with Rule 27(5) of the Insecticides Rules, 1971 (Annexure P-1), order dated 29.4.2019 (Annexure P-9) whereby the application instituted by the respondent under Section 473 of Cr.P.C. was allowed and the summoning order dated 29.4.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Guru Harsahai, District Ferozepur and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Brief facts of the complaint are that on 4.7.2007, Jaswinder Singh, Insecticide Inspector, Guru Harsahai along with Teja Singh, Block Agricultural Officer, Guru Harsahai visited the shop premises of M/s Duggal Pesticides, Guru Harsahai, Ferozepur (dealer), in exercise of the powers conferred upon them by the State Government and drew a sample of insecticide Cartap Hydrochloride 4% G from 5 kg packing manufactured by M/s Acme Organics Private Limited, Noida (UP) having batch No.272, manufacturing date August 2006 and the expiry date July 2008, which was taken at random for the purpose of analysis and the same was put in 3 clean and dry polythene bags separately each weighing 250 grams approximately. The polythene bags were tied tightly and put in 3 separate cloth bags. Then the seizure memo forms No.XX and XXI were prepared and form No.XX was signed by the complainant and Inderpal Singh proprietor of the aforesaid firm also signed the same. Form No.XXI was also put in the aforesaid 3 cloth bags. Then the samples were sealed by following the proper procedure and one part of the sealed sample was handed over to Inderpal Singh against proper receipt. The other two parts of the sealed sample were deposited with Teja Singh, Block Agricultural Officer, Guru Harsahai and then one part of the sample was sent for its analysis to Insecticide Laboratory, Amritsar. After analysis, the said laboratory gave its report dated 20.7.2007, as per which, the sample did not conform to its IS specifications in respect of the percentage active ingredient content, hence, was declared misbranded. Copies of the analysis report along with show cause notices were served to the aforesaid dealer, manufacturer and the marketing company of the said insecticide. The show cause notices were replied by the accused persons but the replies being found not satisfactory, an opportunity of personal hearing was given to the accused persons vide letter dated 10.9.2007. Dealer Inderpal Singh made written request for retesting of the sample as per provisions of Section 24 of the Insecticide Act (in short, 'the Act') and accordingly, second part of the sealed sample was sent to Central Insecticide Testing Laboratory, Faridabad vide letter dated 1.1.2008 for its analysis. Even as per the said re-testing report which was received on 11.3.2008, the sample was not found to be conforming to the relevant specifications in the active ingredient content and thus, declared mis branded. After receipt of the report of re-testing of the second sample, all the formalities were completed and the case was sent to the Director Agriculture, Punjab at Mohali vide letter dated 3.9.2008 for getting proper sanction under the provisions of Section 31(1) of the Act to prosecute all the accused persons. Director Agriculture, Punjab gave sanction to prosecute the accused persons i.e. dealer, manufacturer and the marketing company of the concerned insecticide and to this effect, communication was received by the office of the complainant on 27.12.2017 and immediately, thereafter, impugned complaint (Annexure P-1) was filed by the complainant on 24.1.2018 in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Guru Harsahai.

3. Along with the said complaint, an application under Section 473 of Cr.P.C. was also filed by the complainant seeking condonation of delay in filing of the complai