The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Jt/lemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including the appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 in c.c.No.12711t2o21 pending on the file of Vlll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad. ---- -ffi1.3jc81? ---;/ This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing rhe [\4emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the ar! uments of sri Mohd Muzaffer Ullah Khan, Advocate for the petitioners ancl the sri surepalli Prashanth, Assistant Public prosecutor on behalf of the t*:spondent No. none appeared for the Respondent No.2. .1 The Court made the following: ORDER i E I i I ! .,/ i] , t E I i i i :i, I i : ' I t ' t : j l ' THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUI{.ANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.151OO OF 2024 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Sectiorr 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suratsha Sanhita (for short 'BNSS') by petitioners/accuseC irlos. 1 to 3 to quash the proceedings against thern in C.C.No.l27 1l of 2027 on thc lile of the VIII Additional Chief Judicial l{agistrate, Hydcrabad. The offcnces alleged against petitioncrs are under Sectior-r 420 read with 51 1 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'lPC') and Section 19 of The Seeds Act, 1966

2. I'Ieald Mr. Siddharth Pzrnrl,ar, learned counsel representing Mr. Mohd. Muzaferullah l(hal, learned counsel for petitioners and Mr. Surcpalli Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State Perused the material on record

3. On the basis of a complair-rt dated 09.06.2021 , an F.l.R.No.127 of 2O2l carne to be registered. The gist of the complaint is that, on 09.062O2 1 on credibie information, with the support of local police, respondent No.2- 2 .I \K, J i (l.P Itlrl l0l1 complainant searched the premises of VRL Logir;tics Limited bearing H.No.22-7-27O/20, Devemdevdi, HJrrk:::abad It is stated in the complair-rt that a con stlliiment r.rde LR.No.1034894110, from Chandra Seeds Sto:e., (near OId Vegetable Market, Padra, Vadodara Distnct, 'J u.larat) , \\'as adCressed to I{azarimal Radha i(ishan Taptidil.a. IShop bearing No.22-6-548, Mir Aiam Mandi, H,r,clerabad) Cot-rsignment consisted Chorvlaisag Bhaji,-]reen Se,eds (Amarathus/Thotakura seeds) in ten gunnl bags each containing 500 kgs i,r,orth Rs.75,500/-. A clear violarion of Section 7 of the Seeds Act, 1966, cheating farmers b.v selling thcse seeds .,r,as noted. Panchanama was cortr:h.tcLed in the prcsence of tu,o q,itnesses (Mr. Mohammed tr1aj Khan rlnd M..{. Majeed). T',r,o seed samples were d rrur':r, sent for anal]rsis u,ith necessary documents, to Asslstirnt Director of Agriclrlture, Seeds Tesling Laboratory, RzLl :nd ranagar, Hl,derabad. Respondent No.2 complainant see <; nccessarl,. action to be initiated against Hazarimal RiLclha Kishan Tapadiya -) JAK, J cRr.P 15100 2024

4. Charge sheet is filed for offences under Section 420 read u,ith Seclion 511 of IPC and Section 19 of The Seeds Act, 1966.

5. Learned counsel for petitioncrs submitted that, complaint does not contain any details exccpt that thc consignment is addressed to Hazarimal Radha Kishan Tapadiya. It is further submitted that the consignmcnt was taken from VRL Logistics Limitcd, samplcs arc scnt for testing. It is also submi*"ted that merely on the basis of acldress mentioned, il cannot be held that iL is the act oI petitioners/Al to A3, who secured the seeds, for purposes other than legal.

6. Learned counsel submitted that any business requlres a licence in the name of proprietor r'r'ho runs the business and that the proprietor of the shop u'ould be responsible for violations. That in the present case, no such effort has been made by the Investigating Officer as to who the proprietor is' In the absence of any such legal evidence/proof, petitioners/A1 tqa3 carlnot be named as accused. 4 l,\( .l a Rr.P l5 mr) t0lJ \q: 7 . It is contended that merely because the s,hop address coincides, t-he salne does not establish '.he iact r"hat petitloners piaced an order rvith Chancli a Seeds {at Vadodara, Cujarat State). No eflort is made out to vcr:ifv s;uch details that the see ds were from Chandra Seedr; tt !'adodara, Gujarat State, to the petitioners on an order ple ceci. Thert in the abscnci: of details, petitioners/Al to A 3 cannot bc charged with SecLions 420 read rvith Section 5l 1 ol ipC and Section 1 9 rrf The Seeds Act, 1 966. It is por r. eci cut that petitioners/ A 1 to A3 r,r,ere granted anticipatorv bail. B. On the cther hand, lcarned Assistant Public Prcsecutor for respondent No.1 State in'.,ited the attention of this Cr;urt to the entire record and submitted that petitiorr€rs/Al tc, 43 arc in the lrr-rsiness of seeds and the consipnment is for Choivlaisag Bhaji Green Seeds (Amarathus (Thotakr;ra) seeds) [in ten gunnv bags each containing 500 kgs v,rorth Rs.75,500/ ] addressed to Hazarimal Radha Kishan Tapadiya Shop bearing No.22-6-548, lrlir ,\]am lla.-rcli, Hydcrabad. It is submitted that the case is at appearance stage and no intcrference is necessitated. /.,' 5 ,,AK. J CRLP li 100 2021 g. Heard learned counsels, perused the rccord and considercd rival submissrons

10. Complaint is lodged by respondent No.2, it is stated in the complaint that a consignment vide LR.No.1034894i 10 fron Chandra Seeds Store, was addressed to Hzzarimal Raclha Kishan Tapadiya, Shop bearing No-22 6 548, Mir Alam Mandi, Hyderabad. Consignment $'as of Chorvlaisag Bhaji Green Seeds (Amarathus/Thotakura seeds) in ten gunn]- bags containing 5O0 kgs rrvorth Rs.75,500/-. i 1. It is reflected in the charge sheet that pctitioners/A1 to ,\3 placed the said orCer to Chandra Seeds (Gujarat). It is the duty of Investigating Ofhcer to verify and ascertain as to who is in charge of the business. The Investigating Oflicer has to establish the fact that the business is betng done u'ith licence and that person on whose name licence is granted r,vill be the persorr.to ffi-Eifarged with. 1

12. Petitioners/Al to A3 are said to be carrying on the business of Seeds. But, no licence is placed on record to ascertain as to who is the proprietor of Hazarirr,al Radha 6 J K, ] ( I{LP ti 100 2021 Kishan Tap:rcliya shop. In the absence of an\. icence b,eing placed on record, the Investigating Officer cirmot name ai1 the petitiont:rs/Al to 43 merely because thev are sirting in the shop. It is not even brought to the noticc of tl:is Cor-rrt whether the shop iras any valid licence or not

13. On perusal of the charge sheet, lt is .rlrsenred that petitioners/i|l to A3 have violated Section 7 cf The Seeds Act, 1 966. It is pertinent to extract Section 7 of Ttre Sr:eds Act, 1966, rvhicl-r is as fo1lou.s "7. Regulation of sale of seeds of n,:t:ified kinds or varieties. - No person shall, himsel: ,rr by any other person on iris behalf, carry on the br siness of sellirg. keeping for sale, offering to sell, bartering or otheru lsc suppl,ying anv seed of any notifie:l kino or varie,). r-r r-rlcss, (a) such sced is idcntifiablc as to its kind or var ety; (b) sr-Lcir sced conforms to the minimurn lirtits o1' ger:nination and purity specifii:d under clausc a) of section ,-; (c) the container of such seed bears in the presc-ibed nranner li'rc rnark or label con[aining the correct par[icul:rs thercof, spccified under clause (l;) of sectior-r tr. :rrt cl (d) he con'rplies u,ith sucn othcr rcquiremcnts a s may be prc scriltcd. " :

74. A reading of Secticn 7 of The Seeds Act, 1),i6, specifies that no person by himself or by ar-ry other pers()n, carr,v on ./, l l^t I cRt t, I i trNr lr)t.1 business of selling, keeping for saie, oflering to sell, bartering or othenvise supplying any seed of any notihed i<ir-rd or variet',', unless clauses "a" to "d" are mct with

15. Seeds are seized lrom VRL Logistics Limited (aL Dcvemdevdi, Hyderabad), r,ide consignment bearing Lr.No.1034894 11O, from Chandra Seeds Store, Guiarat, addressed to Hazarimal Radha Kishan Tapadiya Consrgnment is of Chou,laisag Bhali Green Seeds (Amaratl-rus/Thotakura seeds) in ten gunn]'bags. a qLlantit\ of 500 kgs, worth Rs.75,500/-. After conducting panchanamma, seeds q,ere seized, two seed samples were sent lor ana]vsis along u,ith necessarv documents to the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Seeds Testing Laboratorl', Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

16. The tivo samples were sent to the said lab by respondcnt No.2 on 1I.06.2021 with a requisition. A copy of the report of Assistant Director of Agriculture, Seeds Testing Laboratory, dated 23.06.2021 is placed on record. It is observed from the report, for the two seed samples, Lab registration numbels were Vig-4O and Vig-4f . in the remark I 8 .1.\l l ( 1i r) liI00 l0ll column, for Vig ztO, it is remarked as "Cor l:rms to the prescribed slanclards of germinertion (As minintr.i.n) 70'lo". [or Vig-a i, it is rcmarl<cd rLs "(lonlirrnS to tl'r' pr',-'scribcrl standards of gurrnination (As mirtrmuml 7 O"li'

17. On a pcrlrsal o[ the charge sheet, it is olrsen,ed that Sectron 420 rr:ad u ith 5l I of IPC and Sectrt,r 1r) of Thc Seeds Act. I ()(16, \\:erc charged against petitiorrcr s/A1 to A3 Notices un<lrr Section + i A Cr. P.C \t'err, sen'cd on petitiorlers/A I to A3 o|t 28.06.2O21. Scction 1,.) 1- Thc Sccds Act, 1966 spcaks o[ penaltics, ivhich is as follot s " 19. Penalty. - [fa:r1'pcrson (a) contr :rvencs anv provision of tl-ris AcI or ;l rr ' r'Lrk: n-tade lh,:r't u nder: or {b) prcunt a Sct'ci Inspt'r:tor lrr>m taking s rrnpir. under th is r\c1 : or (c) prcvr:rrls a Seed Iltspectol' fronr exercisin q an1 olher po.r er conferrcd on him by or rrnder this Ar , he shall. on conviction. be prrnisl.rablc- (i) for th r lirst olfence ri'itl.r finr: r,r,hich mav exl( n(l tc, livc h,-r nr lt'cl rtrpccs. ar'l<l (ii) in tht cvent of sur:lt pcrsr;n hil,ing br:en prc\' ,,LLs;l\ convicterl of an of'fcncc unclcr this scctiorr. ,r.,ith imprisonmcnt [or' :r tcr-m u,hich mzry r:xtcnd () six months, or u,ith Iine u,hich may extend i r one thousan<l i'lr pees. or'.r.ith both."

18. Seecis folrnd in the consignment \ /ere selt to the St:ed Testing Labolatorl., Assistant L)ircctor of Agricultr-ri'c, SceC I a I : i I I JAK. J CRLP lr 100 202J Testing Laborator-v, Rajendranagar:, Hyderabad, sent a report. In the report, it is stated that the seeds confirmed to the prescribcd stalldarcls of germination. C)ncc, the report of seed analyst (a compctent authority) states confirmation to the minimum limit of gerrrrination and puritl' as specified under the Act, the question of these seeds u'hen sold in the rnarket cannot attract Section 42O tead with 51 1 of IPC and Section 19 of Thc Seeds Act, 1966.It is only when the seeds clo not confirm to the standards or norlrls prescribed, the actions of petitior-rers/ accused Nos. 1 to 3 can be said to fall u,ithin the ambit of these Sections, coupled rvith the applicability of Section 7 of Tlne Seeds Act, 1966. In the prcsent case, the sceds w'ere seized from VRL Logistics Limited and thcy were addressed to the accused shop.

19. It is brought to the notice of this Court that a licenCe in Form-B to carry on business seeds is issued b"v the Iicensing authority (District Agriculture Officer Rangareddy District) which is valid upto 26.07.2027. A copy of the same is placed before this Court and the address mentioned in the licence No.53 12022 is as the same address mentioned in the ,/ 1 l() t\K.l r'it r'j 5 ()0 l0l1 charge sheet i.e H.No.22-6-5481549, Mrr r\lam Mandi, Hvderabad. It is oltsen,ed from the recor cl thal as the business rvrrs lteing c:rrricd out u'ithout zr iic lnsc as on the date ol seizurc of tltc secds frorn VRL Lor-,r:,trcs l.e. ! on

09.06.2O2.1. a casc, has becn registcred.

20. Be that as it mat, seeds are not spuriotr.; rt niltllre and confirm to thc prescribed standards of germ:rr:rticn. It is a fact that pel,itioltcrs/rrc:cused llos. 1 to 3 havr. :-rot been able to placc a r,;llicl liccncc. bclore this Corrrt s ltr r 1ue r icd ,r'ith regard to tire sccd business. Ccnsignrnent st,izr:d liom the VRL Logistics contarrrcd rhc address as I i. R.T Ser:cls., H.No.22-6 5+E/5.+9, Mir Alam Ma.ndi, H_vclc;rrlrad and the seeds rvere in ten llllllny bags. These facts ir -e ltorne. b,v record. In other u'ords, add.ress mentioned in the chiirge sheet, FIR and on liccnce cop_v is sarnc. Br-rt tlr, ssslls a.. i^ conformitv u ith thc standards of the Act. 'l'hc o ri_r' r'rolat_ion w'hich could have been levelled against petitio r ,.rs// accu sed Nos. i to 3 is for not possessiitg a valid licencc ,r' at ali, ttrere are any offcnces u'ltich have to be madc 0nt for non possession of licencc or an_v other violatio p , tht: prc,per I i ! t E I I I l1 ,IAK..I cRLI' I:100 2014 course \\,ould be to indict ti-re petitioners/ accused Nos.l to 3 for such violations

21. For reasons aforesaid, rhis Court is of the opinion that proceedings against petitiolter-s/ accu sed Nos.l to 3 in C.C.No. l27 ll ol 2027 on thc fite of rhe VIit Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hvdcrabad, are liable to be quashed ancl are hercby quashed.

22. Accordir-rgly, the criminal pctition is allowed Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand clo sed To, //TRUE COPYII SD/. C. DEEPIKA STANT REGISTRAR S ECTION OFFICER 'l The Vlt Additional Chief 2 r h e s ta t ro n ii il; o ril"J,.', ?; i [|,ffi F[i:? S/,tB,i ' ,ly;*t"t;l",thePublic ",, 1. ff:33 t%:|:y'i^t Muzarter Urrah Khan, Advocate topucl o,ii; erosecuroi,'riigi'b';;'i#i;" state or reransana ar o, o NVB/gh ],/ HIGH COURT DATED:0410812025 ORDER CRLP.No.15100 ot 2024 I [ 7 ii]i i436 ..\ ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION }}