SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1012/2006 Agrosales & Manufacturing Cooperative Ltd & Ors. VS. State of Raj. { 1 } S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.1012/2006 Agro Sales & Manufacturing Cooperative Ltd., & Ors. vs State of Rajasthan DATE OF ORDER : - 8.7.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Ravindra Acharaya, for the petitioners. Mr. VR Mehta, PP. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have challenged their prosecution launched by the respondent-State under Section 29(1)(A) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1968). The commodity had manufacturing month Jan., 1998 with expiry month Nov., 1999. The sample was taken from the petitioners' premises on 14.8.1998, which was sent for chemical examination and a report was received on 7.10.1998 whereby the respondent found that the sample was sub-standard. Upon this, a show cause notice dated 16.10.1998 was issued to the petitioners. That show cause notice was replied by the petitioners on 3rd Nov., 1998 with a request for sending the sample for testing by Central Laboratory. Again on 10th Nov., 1998 the SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1012/2006 Agrosales & Manufacturing Cooperative Ltd & Ors. VS. State of Raj. { 2 } petitioners requested for sending the sample for re-testing from Central Laboratory, Faridabad. The same was not sent for testing and on 13th May, 1999, the prosecution was sanctioned against the petitioners and in consequence thereof, complaint was submitted in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Merta city on 25th May, 1999. A cognizance was taken on 27th May, 1999 by the court and, thereafter, the summons were issued to the accused. The accused appeared and, thereafter, again on 10.8.1999 submitted an application for sending the sample for chemical examination from Central Laboratory, Faridabad. The said sample was never sent for testing even by the court and the learned APP sought only time for filing reply to the application. In view of the above facts, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been denied a valuable right of obtaining the chemical examination report from the Central Laboratory, which is their legal right under Section 24 of the Act of 1968. learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of this court delivered in the case of Pesticides India Ltd., Vs. State of Rajasthan SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1012/2006 Agrosales & Manufacturing Cooperative Ltd & Ors. VS. State of Raj. { 3 } reported in 2008(1) Cr. Law Reporter (Raj.) 281 (by me) wherein this court considered the issue and finding the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in identical facts and circumstances quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused. In view of the facts mentioned above, the present matter is squarely covered by the judgment above referred and petitioners have been denied an opportunity to contest the case and, therefore, this prosecution cannot proceed. The petition is therefore, allowed. The criminal prosecution in case no.30/2005 – State Vs. Dhanna Ram pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Merta is quashed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.Goyal/-