Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Anil Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to the case and procedural history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding limitation and liability. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning on misbranding. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 4. ratio decidendi regarding accountability under the act. (Para 8) |
| 5. final conclusion and order of quashing the complaint. (Para 10 , 11) |
Judgment
Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.
By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908, petitioner has sought quashing of complaint No.COMA/267/2017, instituted on 11.05.2017, filed under Sections 3 K (I) 17, 18, 29, 33 of the Insecticide Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred as 1968 Act), punishable under Section 29 (1) (9) of The INSECTICIDES ACT , 1968 (for short ‘the Act’) and The INSECTICIDES RULES 1971 as well as summoning order dated 09.06.2017 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar besides, all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Brief facts of the case as noted in the complaint are that Gurcharan Singh- complainant/Insecticide Inspector, Bhogpur (now posted as Agri. Dev. Officer Enf. Jalandar), in exercise of powers conferred upon the him vide government notification No. S 090/ C.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
