M/S J.M. Laboratories v. State of Andhra Pradesh decided on

1. Heard Shri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants in the leading and connected applications and Shri Moti Lal, learned AGA for the State.

2. Today instructions have been forwarded by Shri Moti Lal, in leading and connected applications, is taken on record and according to him, they are self-sufficient and he does not propose to file any affidavit, thus, with the consent of the parties, the application is being decided at the fresh stage.

3. The case of the applicants in the leading application is that on 24.02.2021 first information report was lodged against the applicants by the Station House Officer, police station Bindki, District Fatehpur in case crime No. 65 of 2021, under Sections 272, 273, 420 IPC and Section 59 of the Food 2 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 Safety and Standards Act, 2006 at police station Bindki, District Fatehpur alleging therein that on 24.02.2021 police personnel alongwith officials of Food Security Department received an information that in a Maruti Van adulterated food items were there and on that information the police personnel reached there and recovered Omini Car and arrested Gyan Singh Yadav and Raju Raidas along with one motorcycle and adulterated milk. The applicant thereafter obtained bail and post investigation, a chargesheet against applicants was submitted on 18.05.2021 under Sections 272, 273, 420 IPC and on 24.05.2021, summoning order came to be passed. Thereafter with respect to the same incident, a proceeding under Section 51 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 would also initiated being case No. RST/ 00866 of 2021 in the court of Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Fatehpur imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- each on the applicants by his order dated 08.09.2022 which the applicants deposited. However, a complaint came to be lodged on 29.08.2022 by the opposite party No. 2 with respect to the same incident under Sections 51, 59 (i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, pursuant whereto applicant came to be summoned on

28.11.2022 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47606 of 2022.

4. Questioning the said order, the leading applications came to be preferred.

5. As regards, the connected application is concerned, the facts are the same as in leading application, a complaint came to be lodged on 29.08.2022 being complaint case No. 47607 of 2022 under Section 51, 59(i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the applicant came to be summoned on

28.11.2022 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur which is subject matter of challenge in the connected application.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that it has been passed in a mechanical manner without reciting the case of the complainant without recording any prima facie recording with regard to the applicability/ attraction of the penal sections. He seeks to rely upon the the judgement in SLP (Criminal) No.5067 of 2024, M/S J.M. Laboratories Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh decided on 30.1.2025. However, he submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to Court 3 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 below to pass fresh orders.

7. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that form the perusal of the allegations contained in the complaint prima facie offences are made out and the case is triable, however, he could not dispute the fact that the summoning order has not been passed as per the mandate in M/S J.M. Laboratories (supra). He submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to Court below to pass fresh orders.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

9. The summoning order dated 28.11.2022 in the leading and connected applications are same which is read as under: "आज यह वाद प्ऴ ्षारा साष्य िनरी्षक ्ऺाप्त हुआ। समस्त ्ऺप्ऴों का अवलोकन िकया गया। दजर् पंिजका हो। अिभयु्व जिरये 16-12-22 को पेश हो।"

28.11.2022 (connected application) "आज यह वाद प्ऴ ्षारा साष्य िनरी्षक ्ऺाप्त हुआ। समस्त ्ऺप्ऴों का अवलोकन िकया गया। दजर् पंिजका हो। अिभयु्व जिरये 16-12-22 को पेश हो।"

10. A perusal of the summoning order would reveal that the summoning order is non-speaking and unreasoned and it does not even recite the case of the complainant less to say prima facie application of the penal sections.

11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of JM Laboratories (supra), para 9 whereof is quoted hereinunder.- "9. In the present case also, no reasons even for the namesake have been assigned by the learned Magistrate. The summoning order is totally a non-speaking one. We therefore find that in light of the view taken by us in criminal appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2345 of 2024 titled "INOX Air Products Limited Now Known as INOX Air Products Private Limited and Another v. The State of Andhra Pradesh", and the legal position as has been laid down by this Court in a catena of judgments including in the cases of Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others, Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Central Bureau of Investigation, Mehmood U Rehman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and others and Krishna Lal Chawla and 4 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, the present appeal deserves to be allowed."

12. Since the summoning orders itself is non-speaking and unreasoned and cryptic in nature, thus, it cannot be sustained.

13. The summoning order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47606 of 2022 in leading application and order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47607 of 2022 in connected application are set aside.

14. The matter stands remitted back to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law.

15. For facilitating early disposal, the party shall furnish the certified copy of the order before the court below by 26.09.2025 and the court below shall proceed to decide the said proceeding with most expedition.

16. Needless to point out that the Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case.

17. Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.

18. Instructions filed today are taken on record and marked as Appendix 'A & B'. September 11, 2025 A. Prajapati (Vikas Budhwar,J.) ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Shri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants in the leading and connected applications and Shri Moti Lal, learned AGA for the State.

2. Today instructions have been forwarded by Shri Moti Lal, in leading and connected applications, is taken on record and according to him, they are self-sufficient and he does not propose to file any affidavit, thus, with the consent of the parties, the application is being decided at the fresh stage.

3. The case of the applicants in the leading application is that on 24.02.2021 first information report was lodged against the applicants by the Station House Officer, police station Bindki, District Fatehpur in case crime No. 65 of 2021, under Sections 272, 273, 420 IPC and Section 59 of the Food 2 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 Safety and Standards Act, 2006 at police station Bindki, District Fatehpur alleging therein that on 24.02.2021 police personnel alongwith officials of Food Security Department received an information that in a Maruti Van adulterated food items were there and on that information the police personnel reached there and recovered Omini Car and arrested Gyan Singh Yadav and Raju Raidas along with one motorcycle and adulterated milk. The applicant thereafter obtained bail and post investigation, a chargesheet against applicants was submitted on 18.05.2021 under Sections 272, 273, 420 IPC and on 24.05.2021, summoning order came to be passed. Thereafter with respect to the same incident, a proceeding under Section 51 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 would also initiated being case No. RST/ 00866 of 2021 in the court of Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Fatehpur imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- each on the applicants by his order dated 08.09.2022 which the applicants deposited. However, a complaint came to be lodged on 29.08.2022 by the opposite party No. 2 with respect to the same incident under Sections 51, 59 (i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, pursuant whereto applicant came to be summoned on

28.11.2022 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47606 of 2022.

4. Questioning the said order, the leading applications came to be preferred.

5. As regards, the connected application is concerned, the facts are the same as in leading application, a complaint came to be lodged on 29.08.2022 being complaint case No. 47607 of 2022 under Section 51, 59(i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the applicant came to be summoned on

28.11.2022 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur which is subject matter of challenge in the connected application.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that it has been passed in a mechanical manner without reciting the case of the complainant without recording any prima facie recording with regard to the applicability/ attraction of the penal sections. He seeks to rely upon the the judgement in SLP (Criminal) No.5067 of 2024, M/S J.M. Laboratories Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh decided on 30.1.2025. However, he submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to Court 3 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 below to pass fresh orders.

7. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that form the perusal of the allegations contained in the complaint prima facie offences are made out and the case is triable, however, he could not dispute the fact that the summoning order has not been passed as per the mandate in M/S J.M. Laboratories (supra). He submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to Court below to pass fresh orders.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

9. The summoning order dated 28.11.2022 in the leading and connected applications are same which is read as under: "आज यह वाद प्ऴ ्षारा साष्य िनरी्षक ्ऺाप्त हुआ। समस्त ्ऺप्ऴों का अवलोकन िकया गया। दजर् पंिजका हो। अिभयु्व जिरये 16-12-22 को पेश हो।"

28.11.2022 (connected application) "आज यह वाद प्ऴ ्षारा साष्य िनरी्षक ्ऺाप्त हुआ। समस्त ्ऺप्ऴों का अवलोकन िकया गया। दजर् पंिजका हो। अिभयु्व जिरये 16-12-22 को पेश हो।"

10. A perusal of the summoning order would reveal that the summoning order is non-speaking and unreasoned and it does not even recite the case of the complainant less to say prima facie application of the penal sections.

11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of JM Laboratories (supra), para 9 whereof is quoted hereinunder.- "9. In the present case also, no reasons even for the namesake have been assigned by the learned Magistrate. The summoning order is totally a non-speaking one. We therefore find that in light of the view taken by us in criminal appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2345 of 2024 titled "INOX Air Products Limited Now Known as INOX Air Products Private Limited and Another v. The State of Andhra Pradesh", and the legal position as has been laid down by this Court in a catena of judgments including in the cases of Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others, Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Central Bureau of Investigation, Mehmood U Rehman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and others and Krishna Lal Chawla and 4 NA528 No. 33810 of 2025 others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, the present appeal deserves to be allowed."

12. Since the summoning orders itself is non-speaking and unreasoned and cryptic in nature, thus, it cannot be sustained.

13. The summoning order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47606 of 2022 in leading application and order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Fatehpur in complaint case No. 47607 of 2022 in connected application are set aside.

14. The matter stands remitted back to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law.

15. For facilitating early disposal, the party shall furnish the certified copy of the order before the court below by 26.09.2025 and the court below shall proceed to decide the said proceeding with most expedition.

16. Needless to point out that the Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case.

17. Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.

18. Instructions filed today are taken on record and marked as Appendix 'A & B'. September 11, 2025 A. Prajapati (Vikas Budhwar,J.) ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad