ORDER :

1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the prosecution for the offences under Sections 420 IPC and also Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. According to the charge sheet filed by the Police Shantinagar, a written complaint was filed by the Agricultural Officer stating that the brands namely ‘Arunium’ and ‘Akshi’ varieties of chilli crop seeds are of sub-standard genetic purity. The said seeds were sold by the petitioner’s company, which is M/s.Monsanto Holdings Private Limited. The farmers were made to believe through their authorized dealers that the seeds were of genuine quality and the farmers would be benefited. However, when the farmers have sowed and cultivated the said seeds which were of sub-standard quality, they did not yield any crop and all the farmers have incurred losses. Aggrieved by the said sub-standard quality of seeds, the farmers staged dharna on 19.10.2016.

3. On 20.10.2016, a Scientist of Horticulture Department collected leaf samples from the farmers’ fields and sent for DNA testing analysis for verifying the genetic purity of plants. During investigation, it was found that ‘Arunim’ variety chill crop seeds were received from M/s.Monsanto Holdings Private Limited and ‘Akshi’ variety seeds were received from Univeg Seed Technologies Private Limited.

4. The said samples which were sent for analysis were received by the DNA Finger Printing Laboratory, Hyderabad and declared them as sub-standard mentioning ‘genetic purity does not confirm to the prescribed standards of Genetic Purity’. In the said circumstances, the police conducted investigation and seized stock registers, invoices, licenses, bills books etc., from the retailers. Several farmers were also examined who incurred losses.

5. The Police concluded investigation and arrayed these petitioners along with seven others as liable for the offence under Sections 420 of IPC and Section 7 of the Act.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the entire investigation is void for the reason of the allegations not attracting any of the offences under Section 420 of IPC or Section 7 of the Act.

7. In respect of any spurious seeds, the same would fall within the provisions of the Seeds Act, 1966 (for short ‘the Act of 1966’) and any prosecution can be only under the provisions of the Seeds Act and the Rules made there-under. The Police have no jurisdiction to conduct investigation. Several other grounds are also raised questioning the way in which investigation was conducted. Learned counsel has relied on the judgments of this Court in Sai Seed Agricultural Farms v. State of A.P., 1997 (5) ALD 809, in which, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court held that Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is general Enactment and the Seeds Act 1966 is a Special Enactment dealing only with quality of seeds for agriculture purpose so as to ensure proper quality for germination and consequent yield.

In the said judgment, the Division Bench took notice of both the Enactments and observed that, without delving into the facts of the case whether the activity alleged falls within the ambit of Seeds Act 1966 or Section 3 r/w Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, it was left open to the concerned Court to decide regarding the prosecution under the enactment of Seeds (Control) Order 1983 or the Essential Commodities Act.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners also relied upon the judgment of High Court of Bombay in the case of Korra Srinivas Rao and others v. State of Maharashtra, MANU/MH/0681/2000. The High Court dealt with FIR registered by the police for the offence under Section 420 of IPC. Criminal complaints were filed stating that seeds sold by the petitioners therein did not yield desired results by the farmers as such crime was registered for the offences under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 6(a) and 7(b) of the Seeds Act. The High Court held that criminal case cannot be registered by the police an