Hindustan Lever Ltd. (Now know as Hindustan Unilever Limited) vs State of C.G. and Others

Hon''ble Shri T.P. Sharma, J.—By this petition u/s 482 of the CrPC, the petitioner has prayed for quashment of criminal proceeding pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balod in Criminal Complaint Case No. 14/2009 for the offence punishable u/s 16(1)(a)(i), 16(1)(a)(ii) and 16(1)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short ''the Act''). I have heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused copy of the complaint, copies of order sheets and copies of other documents.

As per case of the prosecution, the Food Inspector has purchased coconut oil manufactured by the petitioner on 27-8-2005 and after complying with the procedure prescribed, sample has been sent for analysis to the Public Analyst and as per report of the Public Analyst dated 13-10-2005, coconut oil was found adulterated. Complaint was filed on 17-11-2008 i.e. after lapse of more than three years from the date of taking sample.

Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that specific fact has been mentioned in the packet that best before 15 months of manufacture. Complaint has been lodged after more than three years of date of taking sample. Therefore, after lapse of 15 months, even from the date of taking sample, the food was not fit for analysis and the accused is deprived from its valuable right of analyzing the sample from the Central Food Laboratory.

Learned Senior Advocate placed reliance in the matter of Hindustan Lever Limited and Another Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh, in which this Court has held that launching of prosecution after period of best before the use of article causes serious prejudice to the accused and deprives of its valuable right to analyze the sample after the said period.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the petition and submitted that inordinate delay by itself is not sufficient for quashment of criminal proceeding, still the prosecution is required to satisfy and explain the delay in lodging such proceeding.

Report of Public Analyst reveals that the coconut oil was best before 15 months from the date of manufacture. But in the present case, prosecution has been launched after more than three years. Considering the specific condition mentioned in the packed material, it was incumbent upon the complainant to ensure that the complaint should be filed sufficient time before expiry of such period and to serve notice u/s 13(2) of the Act to enable the accused to exercise its valuable right available u/s 13(2) of the Act by analyzing the sample from the Central Food Laboratory. However, for the reasons best known to the complainant and authorities, complaint has been filed after three years from the date of taking sample.

As held by this Court in Cr. M.P. No. 53/2011 (M/s. Parle Product Biscuit Pvt. Ltd, and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and another) decided on 22-3-2012, continuance of criminal proceeding against the petitioner would be abuse of process of the Court. Consequently, the petition deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. Criminal proceeding pending against the petitioner before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balod in Criminal Complaint Case No. 14/2009 is hereby quashed.