IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103767 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SRI. MAILARAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA GOUNDIHOSALLI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, TERITARY SALES LEED, M/S KAVERI SEED COMPANY LIMITED, DAVANGERE, C/O. SHREE SAI RAM TRADING COMPANY, APMC YARD KUSTAGI, DIST. KOPPALA-583278.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUSHTAK AHAMED M., SRI. AHAMED M. AND SRI. PRAKASH R.BADIGER, ADVOCATES)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

SRI. MARUTI, OCC. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER AND SEED INSPECTOR, Digitally signed by B AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, K MAHENDRAKUMAR RSK, KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

Location: HIGH COURT OF …RESPONDENT KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE)

Date: 2025.02.05 12:54:37 +0530 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2024 TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN CC NO.1091/2024 OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 19(A) OF SEEDS ACT, AND WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, KARATAGI (ITERNARY COURT, KARATAGI).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent/State.

2. The petitioner challenges the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate for the offense punishable under Section 19A of the Seeds Act, 1966.

3. The respondent filed a private complaint under Section

200 of the Cr.P.C., alleging that the petitioner/accused had supplied hybrid sunflower seeds to the Farmers Information Centre. Upon inspection, samples of the seeds supplied by the petitioner were drawn and sent to the Seeds Analyst and the Agriculture Officer for analysis. The laboratory submitted a report stating that the subject seeds did not conform to the prescribed specifications.

4. The petitioner challenges the cognizance taken on various grounds, including that the procedure prescribed under Section 15 of the Seeds Act has not been followed.

5. Without delving into the issue of whether the procedure under Section 15 of the Seeds Act was followed, it is noted that a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, of which the petitioner/accused is the Manager, has not been arrayed as an accused. Therefore, the petitioner, being the manager of the said company, cannot be held vicariously liable alongside the company, as stated under Section 21 of the Seeds Act.

6. Section 21 of the Seeds Act states that where an offense under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company’s business, as well as the company itself, shall be deemed guilty of the offense and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished. Therefore, on this ground alone, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, taking cognizance of the aforesaid offense, stands vitiated.

7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No.1091/2024 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Itinerary Court, Karatagi, is hereby quashed.

Pending applications, if any, are disposed off as not surviving for consideration.

Sd/-

(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)

JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1