Saraada Ganesh vs. The State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioner, Saraada Ganesh, filed a Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him in C.C. No. 322 of 2021, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Jadcherla. The petitioner is the accused in this case, facing charges under Sections 188, 272, 273, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 58 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2000, Sections 2 to 4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restriction on Sales) Regulation Act, 2011, and Section 20(2) of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003. The petitioner contended that the case is squarely covered by a common order previously passed by the High Court in Criminal Petition No. 9062 of 2021 and batch.

Held

The Court allowed the Criminal Petition, quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 322 of 2021 pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Jadcherla. The Court's reasoning was based on its previous common order in Criminal Petition No. 9062 of 2021 and batch, dated 14.07.2022. In that order, the High Court had repeatedly quashed proceedings where tobacco products were found, holding that the provisions under Sections 188, 272, 273, and 420 of the IPC, Section 58 of the FSS Act, Sections 2 to 4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restriction on Sales) Regulation Act, 2011, and Section 20(2) of the COTP Act were not attracted. The Court reiterated that unless there is comprehensive legislation banning or restricting the use, production, trade, and supply of tobacco products, persons dealing with such products cannot be booked under the law, even though their use is injurious to health. The ratio decidendi is that in the absence of specific legislation prohibiting the sale and transportation of tobacco products, and without evidence of malafide or specific violations of existing regulations (like proper labeling), proceedings under the invoked sections are unsustainable. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application before the Magistrate for the return of seized property/vehicle, and if the products are expired, they shall be destroyed with the Magistrate's permission.

Key Issues

1. Whether the proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C. No. 322 of 2021, under Sections 188, 272, 273, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 58 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2000, Sections 2 to 4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restriction on Sales) Regulation Act, 2011, and Section 20(2) of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003, are liable to be quashed. (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the case is covered by a previous common order of the High Court in Criminal Petition No. 9062 of 2021 and batch, wherein similar proceedings involving tobacco products were quashed. The petitioner relied on this precedent. Revenue/State's contention: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondent (State of Telangana) regarding the petitioner's contentions or the applicability of the cited provisions. The Additional Public Prosecutor appeared for the respondent.