2000 (3) TMI 926 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of charge under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 based on incorrect blend composition markings on cloth samples.

Analysis:
1. Background and Allegations:
The complaint filed by the Textile Commissioner alleged that a company incorrectly marked blend compositions on cloth samples. The samples were collected, tested, and found to have discrepancies in blend percentages compared to the manufacturer's markings.

2. Legal Violations:
The accused company, a manufacturer under the Cotton Textile (Control) Order, was accused of violating provisions leading to an offense under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The petitioner, as the executive president, was held responsible for the company's actions during his tenure.

3. Legal Proceedings:
The Metropolitan Magistrate summoned the accused for trial under section 7. Despite challenges through revisions, the Additional Sessions Judge upheld the order, holding the petitioner accountable for the offense due to his position in the company.

4. Legal Argument and Decision:
The petitioner sought to quash the charge, arguing that his senior position did not make him liable under section 10 of the Act. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that the offense was established in the complaint, and the petitioner's liability could be determined during trial. The charge was upheld, and the petition was dismissed.

5. Judicial Precedents and Conclusion:
The court cited legal precedents emphasizing that proceedings can only be quashed if no offense is constituted based on the complaint. As the allegations in the complaint established the offense, the charge was deemed valid. The court directed the case to be expedited for resolution within four months.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the charge against the petitioner under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The decision emphasized that the petitioner's liability would be determined during trial, and the case was directed to be resolved promptly.