Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
P. N. BAKSHI, J.
MAN MOHAN AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
Criminal Revn. Nos. 1869, 1708 of 1973 and 1487 of 1972 and Cri. Ref. No. 426 of 1973,
Decided On : 6 -9 -1974
ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT - SECTION 10 - SUGAR PACKING AND MARKING ORDER 1970 - APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 10(1) AND 10(2) - INTERPRETATION - LIABILITY OF INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES - INGREDIENTS OF OFFENCE - PROOF - BURDEN OF PROOF.
Fact of the Case:
In four connected cases, the applicants were charged with contravening the Sugar Packing and Marking Order 1970, punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The prosecution alleged that the applicants, being General Managers, Assistant Secretaries, or Commercial Managers of sugar mills, were responsible for the incorrect marking of the grade of sugar on bags, in violation of the order. The applicants challenged the framing of the charges, arguing that there was no evidence to establish their guilt under Section 10(1) or 10(2) of the Essential Commodities Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the applicants could not be held liable under Section 10(1) of the Essential Commodities Act because there was no evidence to prove that they were in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of its business. The court interpreted Section 10(1) to require that both elements be present for individual liability to attach. The court also held that the applicants could not be held liable under Section 10(2) of the Act because there was no evidence to prove that the alleged offence was committed with their consent, connivance, or neglect.
Issues: 1. Whether the applicants could be held liable under Section 10(1) of the Essential Commodities Act for the alleged contravention of the Sugar Packing and Marking Order 1970. 2. Whether the applicants could be held liable under Section 10(2) of the Essential Commodities Act for the alleged contravention of the Sugar Packing and Marking Order 1970.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 10(1) of the Essential Commodities Act requires that, for individual liability to attach, the person charged must be both in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of its business. 2. Section 10(2) of the Essential Commodities Act requires that, for individual liability to attach, the offence must have been committed with the consent, connivance, or neglect of the person charged.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revisions and accepted the reference, quashing the charges framed against the applicants in all four cases.
1. As common questions of law are involved in Criminal Revisions Nos. 1869 of 1973, 1487 of 1972 and Criminal Reference No. 426 of 1973, they have been ordered to be connected with Criminal Revision No. 1708 of 1973. I shall dispose them of by this common judgement.
Criminal Revision No. 1869 of 1973 :
2. Applicant Man Mohan is the General Manager and applicant G.K. Mathur is the Assistant Secretary of Messrs. Daurala Sugar Works, Daurala. They are being prosecuted for contravention of clause IV(1) of the Government of India, Ministry of Food and Agriculture. Community Development and Co-operation (Department of Food) New Delhi, Order No. G. S R. 645/Ess. Com/Sugar dated 14th April 1970, known as the Sugar Packing and Marking Order 1970 punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 1955.
3. The case for the prosecution is that R.D. Sethi, Inspector of Directorate of Sugar and Vanaspati, Department of Food Government of India collected 12 samples of sugar from M/s. Daurala Sugar Works on 14th June, 1971, from the factory godown relating to the stocks of 1970-71 production. Two of these samples were tested by the National Sugar Institute Kanpur on 7th January, 1971 out of which one sample was found inferior in grade than that which was marked on it by the factory. The marking was C-30 but the grade was C-29. A show cause notice was served on the factory. The explanation of the factory was not found to be satisfactory, hence a complaint was filed under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. K.P. Agarwal Technical Advisor National Sugar Institute Kanpur and R.D. Sethi, Inspector Directorate of Sugar and Vanaspati were examined in support of the complainants case, K.P. Agarwal proved the report prepared by K. Joshi, who had analysed the sugar in question. The Magistrate found that a prima facie case had been made out against the accused as such he framed a charge against them which is the subject-matter of the dispute. A revision was filed before the Sessions Judge which was dismissed on 23rd August, 1973, hence the present revision.
Criminal Revision No. 1487 of 1972 :
4. Applicant B.L. Kapoor is the General Manager and D.P. Gupta is the Works Secretary of Mawana Sugar Works. On 28th November, 1970, R.D. Sethi Inspector aforesaid took ten samples of sugar from the factory godown of the above mentioned concern from the 1969-70/1970-71 seasons production. One of these samples was sent for testing to the National Sugar Institute, Kanpur, on 29-1-1971 and the analysis was conducted on 25-2-1971. The sample was found lower in grade than that marked by the factory. In response to a show cause notice an explanation was given by the factory which was not found to be satisfactory. Hence the applicants were prosecuted under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The report of the National Sugar Institute Kanpur disclosed that the sample was marked C-29 but the grade was C-28. The prosecution examined R.D. Sethi, Inspector and A.K. Gupta of the National Sugar Institute Kanpur, in support of the allegations in the complaint. A.K. Gupta proved the report of analysis prepared by K. Joshi. The Magistrate being satisfied that a prima facie case had been made out framed a charge against the accused. A revision was filed before the Sessions Judge Meerut which was dismissed on 22nd July, 1972. Hence this revision.
Criminal Reference No. 426 of 1973 :
5. In this case a complaint under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act was lodged against S.R. Agarwal, General Manager and V.K. Jindal, Commercial Manager of M/s, Dhampur Sugar Mills. T.R. Malhotra, Inspector (Sugar), Directorate of Sugar and Vanaspati collected 12 samples of sugar from the stocks of the factory godown relating to 1970-71 season production on 5th June 1971. Two of these samples were sent for analysis to the National Sugar Institute, Kanpur, out of which as per report one of the samples was found lower in grade than that marked by the factory. T
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
