Manish Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. Another) for quashing the entire proceedings of case no

Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Agarwal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Geeta Pandey,Namit Srivastava,Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Mr. Namit Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant petition has been preferred for challenging order passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 through which cognizance has been taken up by the court concerned in pursuance of Sections 26 and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "FSS Act, 2005") and posted the matter for leading evidence for 2nd April, 2024 along with order dated 12th September, 2024 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Criminal Revision No. 69 of 2024 through which, order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 has been put under challenge.

3. The factual matrix of the matter derives that earlier the petitioner approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another) for quashing the entire proceedings of case no. 5560 of 2022 (State of U.P. through Director Food Safety OfÏcer, Pilibhit Vs. Manish Kumar Agrawal & Another) under Sections 26 and 59 of FSS Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Pilibhit pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit as well as summoning order dated 25th March, 2022 and N.B.W. order dated 19th September, 2023, wherein specific grounds have been taken by the petitioner that (a) the summoning order dated 25th March, 2022 is totally non-speaking and without application of mind, (b) the same does not even speak of as to who are the accused, (c) the satisfaction of the court concerned regarding there being a prima facie evidence against the accused and also as to under what sections the accused has been summoned. On the above grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the order impugned dated 25th March, 2022 is bad in the eyes of law as it suffers from inherent defect.

4. By means of the order dated 2nd January, 2024, a Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the aforementioned grounds so raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, allowed the application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. preferred by the petitioner and remitted the matter to the court below to pass a fresh order in accordance with law and in light of the judgments as cited in the order itself within a period of three weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order dated 2nd January, 2024. It is very important to mention here that the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was allowed and also direction was issued by the Coordinate Bench without quashing or setting aside the impugned order.

5. In compliance to order dated 2nd January, 2024, fresh order has been passed by court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit on 29th February, 2024 through which again cognizance has been taken up in pursuance of Sections 26 and 59 of FSS Act and the petitioner has been summoned. Being aggrieved by the order dated 29th February, 2024, the petitioner again preferred a revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 69 of 2024 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. through Food Safety OfÏcer, Pilibhit & Another) on the ground of non- compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act and other factual grounds inter alia. The same has again been dismissed by the revisional court i.e. Session Judge, Pilibhit vide order dated 12th September, 2024 upholding the order dated 29th February, 2024 and negated the stand taken up by the petitioner in the revision.

6. Through the instant petition, orders dated 29th February, 2024 and dated 12th September, 2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit and Sessions Judge, Pilibhit respectively have been put under challenge precisely on four grounds:- (a) non-compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act; (b) once the matter has been remitted back by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another), it was the duty incumbent i.e. the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit to record reason and its satisfaction to summon the petitioner again so that the petitioner may surrender before the court concerned in pursuance of the fresh summoning order; (c) the impugned order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 has been passed after the prescribed stipulated period as directed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024; and (d) after seeking report regarding determination of the adulteration from the sample, which has been obtained for testing, from the premises/unit owned and conducted by the father of the petitioner on 23rd January, 2021 and thereafter when the same has been put under challenge in pursuance of Section 46 (4) of FSS Act, report received from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata dated 14th July, 2021, no specific finding has been recorded by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow while passing the accordance order dated 25th February, 2022.

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that entire proceedings have been conducted well in accordance with law and as per prescribed procedure contained in FSS Act, since after receiving the report dated 6th March, 2021 given by the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow, right mentioned in Section 42 (4) of FSS Act has been availed by the petitioner and thereafter report from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata has been received on 14th July, 2021 and immediately after receiving the same in pursuance of Section 77 of FSS Act reasons have been recorded by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow on 25th February, 2022. The cognizance taken up by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit was well within time i.e. 25th March, 2022. Learned A.G.A. also submitted that there is hardly any case of non-compliance of statutory provisions contained in FSS Act and as such, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.

8. After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the instant petition, in the interest of justice, it is necessary to recapitulate the earlier proceedings, which have already been preferred at the behest of the petitioner i.e. while preferring Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another), which culminated into an order dated 2nd January, 2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, wherein all the grounds were taken up and the arguments have been specifically mentioned in the order itself, by way of perusal of the order dated 2nd January, 2024, not even a single ground has been taken with regard to Section 77 of FSS Act, which was very much available with the petitioner at the same time and as such, no cognizance has been taken up by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Only ground mentioned in the order itself that the cognizance order dated 25th March, 2022 is not speaking, which is having absence with regard to satisfaction of the court concerned, there being a prima facie evidence against the accused and also as to under what sections the accused person has been summoned?

9. Fresh ground taken up while preferring the second litigation arising out of fresh summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 and thereafter revisional order, by which the fresh summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 has been upheld, cannot be taken up for consideration by this Court. Since the scope has already been limitized by the order dated 2nd January, 2024, which has been passed by the Coordinate Bench, the scope for adjudication of the controversy as taken up by the learned counsel for the petitioner is confined only to the extent of judicial scrutiny in respect of order dated 29th February, 2024, which is speaking or not?

10. At the same time, the propriety law demands that behind speaking order, there must be reasoning recorded by the concerned court. The instant petition is being adjudicated on the limited scope but for the sake of gravity of ground as raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and for reaching ends of justice, new ground as taken up by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to non- compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act is having no substance. After receiving the report from the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow right contained in Section 42 (4) of FSS Act has been duly availed by the petitioner and after receiving the report from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata cognizance has been taken up immediately within a month thereafter, in between correspondence order which has been issued by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow on 25th February, 2022, wherein specific stages have been defined in respect of receiving of reports from the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow and Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata, which slightly delayed the proceedings and such delay is covered as mentioned in the proviso to Section 77 of FSS Act.

11. So far as the ground relating to summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 is concerned, the same is also confined only to the direction issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024 in the sake of disclosing of reasons and specific reproduction of name of the accused in pursuance of section also and the same seems to be in accordance with the direction of the Coordinate Bench passed vide order dated 2nd January, 2024, since on earlier occasion summoning order was not disturbed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court while passing order dated 2nd January, 2024 and as such, there is hardly any infirmity available herein and the revision preferred at the behest of the petitioner has rightly been rejected by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 12th September, 2024.

12.In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case and reasons recorded herein above, the instant petition lacks of merit and hence it is dismissed. (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Sushil/- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Agarwal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Geeta Pandey,Namit Srivastava,Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Mr. Namit Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant petition has been preferred for challenging order passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 through which cognizance has been taken up by the court concerned in pursuance of Sections 26 and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "FSS Act, 2005") and posted the matter for leading evidence for 2nd April, 2024 along with order dated 12th September, 2024 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Criminal Revision No. 69 of 2024 through which, order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 has been put under challenge.

3. The factual matrix of the matter derives that earlier the petitioner approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another) for quashing the entire proceedings of case no. 5560 of 2022 (State of U.P. through Director Food Safety OfÏcer, Pilibhit Vs. Manish Kumar Agrawal & Another) under Sections 26 and 59 of FSS Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Pilibhit pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit as well as summoning order dated 25th March, 2022 and N.B.W. order dated 19th September, 2023, wherein specific grounds have been taken by the petitioner that (a) the summoning order dated 25th March, 2022 is totally non-speaking and without application of mind, (b) the same does not even speak of as to who are the accused, (c) the satisfaction of the court concerned regarding there being a prima facie evidence against the accused and also as to under what sections the accused has been summoned. On the above grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the order impugned dated 25th March, 2022 is bad in the eyes of law as it suffers from inherent defect.

4. By means of the order dated 2nd January, 2024, a Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the aforementioned grounds so raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, allowed the application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. preferred by the petitioner and remitted the matter to the court below to pass a fresh order in accordance with law and in light of the judgments as cited in the order itself within a period of three weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order dated 2nd January, 2024. It is very important to mention here that the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was allowed and also direction was issued by the Coordinate Bench without quashing or setting aside the impugned order.

5. In compliance to order dated 2nd January, 2024, fresh order has been passed by court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit on 29th February, 2024 through which again cognizance has been taken up in pursuance of Sections 26 and 59 of FSS Act and the petitioner has been summoned. Being aggrieved by the order dated 29th February, 2024, the petitioner again preferred a revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 69 of 2024 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. through Food Safety OfÏcer, Pilibhit & Another) on the ground of non- compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act and other factual grounds inter alia. The same has again been dismissed by the revisional court i.e. Session Judge, Pilibhit vide order dated 12th September, 2024 upholding the order dated 29th February, 2024 and negated the stand taken up by the petitioner in the revision.

6. Through the instant petition, orders dated 29th February, 2024 and dated 12th September, 2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit and Sessions Judge, Pilibhit respectively have been put under challenge precisely on four grounds:- (a) non-compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act; (b) once the matter has been remitted back by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another), it was the duty incumbent i.e. the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit to record reason and its satisfaction to summon the petitioner again so that the petitioner may surrender before the court concerned in pursuance of the fresh summoning order; (c) the impugned order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit dated 29th February, 2024 has been passed after the prescribed stipulated period as directed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024; and (d) after seeking report regarding determination of the adulteration from the sample, which has been obtained for testing, from the premises/unit owned and conducted by the father of the petitioner on 23rd January, 2021 and thereafter when the same has been put under challenge in pursuance of Section 46 (4) of FSS Act, report received from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata dated 14th July, 2021, no specific finding has been recorded by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow while passing the accordance order dated 25th February, 2022.

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that entire proceedings have been conducted well in accordance with law and as per prescribed procedure contained in FSS Act, since after receiving the report dated 6th March, 2021 given by the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow, right mentioned in Section 42 (4) of FSS Act has been availed by the petitioner and thereafter report from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata has been received on 14th July, 2021 and immediately after receiving the same in pursuance of Section 77 of FSS Act reasons have been recorded by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow on 25th February, 2022. The cognizance taken up by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.1, Pilibhit was well within time i.e. 25th March, 2022. Learned A.G.A. also submitted that there is hardly any case of non-compliance of statutory provisions contained in FSS Act and as such, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.

8. After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the instant petition, in the interest of justice, it is necessary to recapitulate the earlier proceedings, which have already been preferred at the behest of the petitioner i.e. while preferring Application U/S 482 No. 39077 of 2023 (Manish Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. & Another), which culminated into an order dated 2nd January, 2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, wherein all the grounds were taken up and the arguments have been specifically mentioned in the order itself, by way of perusal of the order dated 2nd January, 2024, not even a single ground has been taken with regard to Section 77 of FSS Act, which was very much available with the petitioner at the same time and as such, no cognizance has been taken up by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Only ground mentioned in the order itself that the cognizance order dated 25th March, 2022 is not speaking, which is having absence with regard to satisfaction of the court concerned, there being a prima facie evidence against the accused and also as to under what sections the accused person has been summoned?

9. Fresh ground taken up while preferring the second litigation arising out of fresh summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 and thereafter revisional order, by which the fresh summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 has been upheld, cannot be taken up for consideration by this Court. Since the scope has already been limitized by the order dated 2nd January, 2024, which has been passed by the Coordinate Bench, the scope for adjudication of the controversy as taken up by the learned counsel for the petitioner is confined only to the extent of judicial scrutiny in respect of order dated 29th February, 2024, which is speaking or not?

10. At the same time, the propriety law demands that behind speaking order, there must be reasoning recorded by the concerned court. The instant petition is being adjudicated on the limited scope but for the sake of gravity of ground as raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and for reaching ends of justice, new ground as taken up by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to non- compliance of Section 77 of FSS Act is having no substance. After receiving the report from the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow right contained in Section 42 (4) of FSS Act has been duly availed by the petitioner and after receiving the report from the Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata cognizance has been taken up immediately within a month thereafter, in between correspondence order which has been issued by the Commissioner Food Safety and Medicine Administration Department, Lucknow on 25th February, 2022, wherein specific stages have been defined in respect of receiving of reports from the Government Public Analyst Laboratory, U.P. Lucknow and Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata, which slightly delayed the proceedings and such delay is covered as mentioned in the proviso to Section 77 of FSS Act.

11. So far as the ground relating to summoning order dated 29th February, 2024 is concerned, the same is also confined only to the direction issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd January, 2024 in the sake of disclosing of reasons and specific reproduction of name of the accused in pursuance of section also and the same seems to be in accordance with the direction of the Coordinate Bench passed vide order dated 2nd January, 2024, since on earlier occasion summoning order was not disturbed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court while passing order dated 2nd January, 2024 and as such, there is hardly any infirmity available herein and the revision preferred at the behest of the petitioner has rightly been rejected by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 12th September, 2024.

12.In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case and reasons recorded herein above, the instant petition lacks of merit and hence it is dismissed. (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Sushil/- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad