Ravi Nath Verma JUDGMENT
Ravi Nath Verma, J.
1. Invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 14.05.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. C-IV/43 of 2008 whereby the cognizance of offence under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) & (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short "the P.F.A. Act") has been taken and has also prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding so far as it relates to him.
2. Before I state the prosecution case, the background of the case is necessary to be discussed to appreciate the issue involved in this case. The petitioner, who is the Managing Director of Pantaloon Retail (India) Ltd. with its registered office at Jogeshwari, Mumbai, has his permanent posting at Mumbai but he has to travel all over the country particularly to the big cities where most of the controlling centers of the Retail Stores of the company are located. The company has hierarchy of officials looking after the various aspects managerial, financial, Supervisory, Quality, Standard and Safety etc. and all purchases for the company are made by the Purchase Department, both from local and outside sources and it is the exclusive liability of the Quality Control Officers to maintain and ensure the best quality of each and every item. The petitioner, being the Managing Director of the company, is concerned with the policy matters and has no concern with the day-to-day purchase and sale of thousands of articles and goods being sold in nearly 500 Retails stores of the company. One such Retail Outlet namely "Big Bazar" was opened at Ranchi on 28th March, 2008.
3. Now in the above background, let the prosecution case be examined. At the instance of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi, the prosecution report was sent to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate whereafter, the aforesaid case was lodged with the allegation that one K.P. Singh, Food Inspector, Ranchi, visited the "Big Bazar" on 01.04.2008 barely on the 5th day of opening of the store along with his staff and physically examined hundreds of food items displayed on the racks as well as from those items, which were yet to be displayed for sale and took samples of 'Chana Sattu' 500 gr. x 3 packaging dated 18th March, 2000, Chana Besan 500 gr. x 3, Chana Dal 500 gr. x 3 and Toor (Arhar) Dal 500 gr. x 3 of the same dates and Pure Cow Ghee from the store. The samples were sent to the Public Analyst of State Food and Drug Laboratory, Namkom, Ranchi for its analysis. The Public Analyst submitted his report dated 05.05.2008 showing the sample of Chana Besan as the 'misbranded' within the meaning of Section 2(ix)(k) of the P.F.A. Act, 1954 by virtue of violation of Rule 32(b) and (e) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (in short "the Rules, 1955") holding that the sample does not bear batch number/lot number and details of the ingredients used as required under the Rules, 1955. On the basis of the said report of the Public Analyst, the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer forwarded the prosecution report-cum-complaint to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi
4. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi being satisfied with the prima facie case under Section 16(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the P.F.A. Act, took cognizance of the offence under the aforesaid sections. Thereafter, summons were issued against the present petitioner and one Nitin Singhania, Assistant Manager of "Big Bazar" at Ranchi.
5. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner while assailing the order taking cognizance of offence as bad in law and against the settled principles, seriously contended that the allegations made in the complaint even if taken at their face value as true together with the report of the Public Analyst, no offence is made out against........