IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2011/19TH KARTHIKA1933 CRMC.No. 639 of 2005 ( ) ------------------------ CC.802/2004 of J.M.F.C.-I,KOCHI ACCUSED(S)/ACCUSED NOS.3 TO 11:: --------------- 1. M.G.RAMASWAMI, MADATHINKAL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., PRESIDENT N.S.C. BANK LTD. NO.E-92. 2. P.A.CHINNAPPAN, PUNCHEPPADY HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., VICEPRESIDENT N.S.C. BANK LTD.NO.E-92. 3. E.V.RAMESH KUMAR, EMBRAN MADOM HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR N.S.C. BANK LTD. NO.E-92. 4. N.A.VARGHESE, NARIKULAM HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR N.S.C. BANK LTD. NO.E-92. 5. K.A.PEIOUS, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR N.S.C. BANK LTD.NO.E-92. 6. A.D.MURUKESAN, AMMAMKATTUKALATHIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O. DIRECTOR, N.S.C. BANK LTD.NO.E-92. 7. A.O. INAS, ARAKKAL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR N.S.C. BANK LTD.NO.E-92. 8. N.R.GIREESAN, NAMBRATTITHARA HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR, N.S.C. BANK LTD.NO.E-92. 9. M.N.SARASWATHI, KALLUMADATHIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., DIRECTOR N.S.C. BANK LTD. NO.E-92. BY ADV. SRI.N.A.MURALEEDHARAN CRMC.No. 639 of 2005 ( ) --2-- COMPLAINANTS/FOOD INSPECTOR & STATE:: ---------------------- 1. FOOD INSPECTOR, NAYARAMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, COCHIN CIRCLE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , S.SURESH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-11- 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRMC.No. 639 of 2005 ( ) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE -1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C.NO.802/2004 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.1, KOCHI DATED 1-10-2004 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE smm P.S.GOPINATHAN. J --------------------------------- CRMC No. 639 OF 2005 --------------------------------- Dated this the 10 th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by accused Nos.3 to 11 in C.C.No.802/2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Cochin. 1st respondent, the Food Inspector, Nayarambalam, on 25.4.2003, in accordance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules thereunder purchased 750 gms of Dal from a store run by Nayarambalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.E92, Nayarambalam (herein after referred to as 'the Bank') for the purpose of analysis. On analysis Dal was found adulterated. 1st accused in the complaint is the sales man, 2nd and 12th accused are the Secretary and Bank respectively and 13th accused is the distributor. Petitioners herein are alleged to be President and members of the Director Board. They were arrayed as accused as owner of the shop from CRMC No. 639 OF 2005 2 where the sample was taken. According to the petitioners, there is no whisper in the complaint that they were persons nominated under Section 17 of the PFA Act or that they were in charge and responsible for the day to day conduct of the business of the bank which is running the consumer store. Therefore, according to the petitioners, they are not liable to be prosecuted. It is also alleged that there is no averment in the complaint that the offence alleged, if any was committed with the consent or connivance or is attributable to any neglect on the part of the petitioners as prescribed under section 17(4) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. With these allegations they sought for quashing the complaint as against them. 2. Going by the averments in the complaint, as rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner there is no whisper that the petitioners were anyway responsible for the conduct of the business of the Bank. It appears from the complaint that the petitioners were CRMC No. 639 OF 2005 3 arrayed among the accused for the reason that they are members of the Director Board. There is no whisper in the complaint that they have any role in the running of the business. In an almost identical case, this court in Crl.M.C.955/93 quashed the prosecution proceedings as against the president and members of the Board. Having gone through the entire facts and circumstances especially the nature of the allegations in the complaint , I find no reason to take divergent view. In the above circumstance while allowing the petition, the proceedings as against the petitioners are hereby quashed. The complaint as against the petitioners who were accused 3 to 11 will stand dismissed. P.S.GOPINATHAN JUDGE MM CRMC No. 639 OF 2005 4 CRMC No. 639 OF 2005 5