A. Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD MONDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEIUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7263 OF 2022 ALONG WITH l.A.No. 1 OF 2022 Between:

A. Santosh Kumar, S/o late Sri M. Sangameshwar' aged about 40 years' occiirsi"lt. rlo A.id.zz-z-lol , Komatiwadi, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad KRaohavender.s/oKandeChandrashekhar,Agedabout35.years'occiji,Jr}l".r. ii" n.r.io.i-z-i1oalsl46, Sanjeevnagar, Tilaknagar, Hvderabad ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No' 1 & 2 AND The State of Telangana, through Police Station Dabeerpura, Hyderabad' rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT PetitionunderSection4S2ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofcriminalPetition,theHighcourtmay 6" pflri"J toto quash the C.C.No.5863t2o21 on the file of the Honourable Vlll ROditlonat Chief i/etropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally' Hyderabad' against the petitio ners/Accused No.1 and 2 herein, for the interest of justice' t.A. NO: 1 OF 2022 PetitionUnderSection4S2ofCr,P.

Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition,the High court may be pleased lo pass an order, directing the respondent herein to release the ieized permissible tobacco products in F.l.R No.Zgl2020 dated- 1910412020 and aswell,asseizedvehiclei.e.TVSJupitervehicleVideregistrationNolSllEP S66t nelonging to petitioner/A-1 oi Police Station Dabeerpura' Hyderabad' iC.C.r.'ro.seo"3liozo o,n the file of the Honourable All Additional Chief Metropolitan i,l"gi.i*t", at Nampally, Hyderabad) and handover the same to the petitioner/A1, p-ending disposal of main Crl.P.

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Cflminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S cHANDRASEKHAR .Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'1 . The Court made the following: ORDER

Crl.Petition No.7263 of 2022 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.7263 OF 2422 ALONG WITH I.A.No.L of 2022 COMMON ORDER:

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), is filed by the petitioners to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.5683 of 2020, pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

2.

The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in the said cnme.

The offences alleged against them are under Sections 1BB, 269,273,336 and 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC)

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Perused the record. 4.

Perusal of the record would reveal that the lis involved in this case had already been dealt with by this Court extensively vide common order dated 05.07.202I in Crl.P. No.152 of 2020 and batch which was reported in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed v. State of

Crl.Petition No.7263 of 2022 Telangana' and also vide common order dated 10'06'2022 in Crl.P.No.5619 of 2020 and batch.

5. Therefore, this Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.5683 of 2020, pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, in terms of the common order, dated 05.07 -202t passed by this Court in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed (Supra) and also common order dated t0.06.2022 in Crl.P.No.5619 of 2020 and batch'

6. As the proceedings In the aforesaid Criminal Petition are quashed against the petitioners, the Station House Officer/Investigating Officer is hereby directed to return the seized property/vehicle on proper identiflcation and verification of ownership under due acknowledgment. Since the charge sheet is already filed, the petitioners are at liberty to file an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate for return of the seized property/vehicle and the Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance With law. However, it is made clear that if the seized stock of tobacco products or other products are expired, the same ' l{)lt ( ,it .t {,11

Crl. Petition No.7263 ol 2022 shall be destroyed by taking permission from the concerned Magistrate.

7. The copy of the common orders passed by this Court in Crirninal Petition No.152 of 2020 and batch on 05.01 .2021 and also in Criminal Petition No.5619 of 2020 and batch on 10.06.2022, shall form part of this order.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Petition stand closed.

I Sd/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (t'

SECTION OFFICER To, I I I \ i/TRUE COPY/i

1. The Vlll Additional Chief t\4etropolitan Magistrate' at Nampally' Hyderabad .

2. The Station House Officer,Dabeerpura Police Station , Hyderabad.

3. Two CCs to Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.(OUT)

4. One CC to SRl. S CHANDRASEKHAR Advocate [OPUC]

5. Two CD Copies (Along rr,ith copy of thc order passed in crl.P.No.152/20 and Batch dt.05.07.2021 and Crl.P.No.56l9i 20 and Batch dt.10.O6.2022) CDL karl

HIGH COURT KSJ DATED:1 911212022 COMMON ORDER CRL.P.No.7263 of 2022 ALONG \\ ITtl I. \.\o. I Ol.' 2021 \ oe 1gE S r.t, r{.

((\( zi) o 2 1 JAtl 2!23 \\ ':

\, Dc .lPA''-a,i 1'

ALLOWIN(; TtIE CTtI]\IIN.\L PETITION <lt) l!'/> ->\\'\,:

,\i r (,//' \,, /i',,/ ,,'//,( /r,r,/r llON'llt.[- St{l .lUS I'l(]lt l(. L,,\KSIIN,L\N flltlNII\.\t- I'FlTl'l lON \os.152. l5f. 155. 162 3.l9lj. 35{l{). -1509. .151{. .176tt, .1879, 40.16, 4070, ,1077. 10911, .1099, .l I (X), -1t02 {l tr 4t l9 -l t.l{r .llll .ll5r 4157 1t7u ,l |lt2 .11u7 .{ I9{ 1216 {2-10, -ll{7. -ll-19, { t5 l. {2 58, .12 62. 1277, 1361, {J05, l{ 15, 45.12. .16 I I, -1615 1622 { (rl2 {6{1) .l6ll l 1727 1775 & 4825 0t,- 2021 coi\tNIoN ottl)t._R:

All the abovc Criminal Petitions arc filcd to quash the procecdings agxinst the petitioners accused in respective Crimes I Calenclar C'ases. Tlie cletails ol relavant Crimes / Calendar Cascs. ot-fences alleged, nature of ollences etc., are mentioned in the lollowing tabular form:

Ollences allegedly co rmitted st.

Ntt (rl l'

Accused Number ( rirnc- No.

tr_,, Nalure ofollince 272, 2'13 tPC & 20 (2) r/w 7(2) of COTPA I l7 l() ol l'S N'lanoharahatl ll/l I of PS Kadanr Transportation ol Amb('r tobacco sole accrsed 0l .t76ri.I I 0l sole accused 2'70 & 2',73 'C Sale ofbanned tobacco products 387q I I ,104611I 78i21 of PS (T) Adilabad At & 2 <Ir Sale ofgutkaitobacco illegally in godown 0l 10'7'1121 llill ol PS Possession oIgutka /tobacco in pan shop ()l sole accused -doAl to3 270, 2',73 rPC & 20 (2) ofCOTPA 'lransportatioD of rohibited gutka l09s I l 185/21 of PS (T) Nirmal P sole accused No.l6/21 of PS Koulala r70 & 271 IP('

Posscssion ol-tobacco products in the house l0qe lt 0(i 170 &273 tPC Possession ofbanned gutka & othcr k)bacco items in par shop -155/21 ol' PS Kukaqrally !

No.l8/21 of PS Easgoar -l ltx ) ll sole accused 07.

336, 2'.13 & t88 IPC & 59 (i) of FSSA Transponation and sale ol' prohi[.rited tobacco ( )li ll0l'

solc accused roduc(s I I

.t AI t ( t i t, \| I :t t,t .|:tt <l htu t) t7() & I jl ll,( & l(l(lr r \\ '-(lr ol- ( 0IP,\ .15"1I ol Ps ( hiragpalll'

lransp()rtati()lt of tolracco producls |rtll \IIt' i l_r(l l9S:l ol- PS ( houtu|l)al l7l & t7.l rP( & 2o (l)ol'col l'A .t7t t7 r .* ]28 rPc&20(l)&7 (-l ) of ( OTPA Sltrr:r!,c oI k)bacco uctq tbr salc s,,tc l l 51/I l(l aeetrscd I lt .1r 57 l Purchaso and salc ol'

Ir,,hibrled tr)bacco ll.1 ll of I'S ( lrit\ al (NI (ir .\ I ro-.1 r{)(luc(s I I-ransportation of banncd :70&17..t IPC 74i21 olPS hurr lcm 3{)1,31 of PS ( I ) Manohcrial ll 4 t82,21 lobacco/ 1ka Possession ofbanned lobacco products ll tlrt 4187,2 r accused 424'7 i2l 6l/21 ol t'S II lixr n Adilab:rrl t.l -doPosscssi()n ofbanned {utkil products sole acr usl'd l0l/21 of PS I I orvn Adilabad .,\ | & l drr Sale ol'gu1ka and tobacco products About lo traflsport noriious gutka and li)bacco products 4249t2t I -T l-- l 90/21 of PS I .lorrn Adilabad 9l/21 of PS I Tou,n Adilabad l07rl I ol PS I Iown Adilabad solc acctrie-d 4t5l 2 t -doI6 I Salc olbanned gutka and lobacco producLs Transportiltion of gutka and tobacco products dr,- 4l5li,l I t1 accused .\l & l L I l8 clo4162t21 16212l of PS Abdullapunnct Salc of banned tobacco (tambaku) products in lorD, I li8, 172. 27] & 3ln lP(l 4211121 Al rol I8ll. l7t & l7l IP(] l0l'l I of Pli t 1 rarrsportatio n of gutka/tobacco products I solc 3qcr1sgl.

sole accused l0 4.105,1I _l ou.n Na Irtllr lll ll ol PS tt Nal i) Posscssion of banned gutka /tobacco ploducls ll 4.1 l -i I I rlo- ,\t & l lli8. 2{r9. 270, 271 rtv ..1.1 lt'C & 3olEDA&51 (b) of DMA 87/2 | of PS ltl Possessioo oftollacco products in kirana shop 4542',2 t (.1 ) Kothagudem 215121 of PS Nirmal Town 89120 of Mamada Posscssion of prohibitcd tobacco products for sale ,\l i( l l3 4615 2 r 270 & 273 IPC -do- rAv 14 lP('

Transportation of banned lobacco/gutka pockets l-l 4640 2 I PS ,\l A] 328 rlt't 5ll, 272 & 27] IPC Possession ofbanned gutka & tobacco products in kirana shop 4681 2 | i 186/21 of PS Peddavoora I Transportation of cigarette or other tobacco products without valid liccn-sc 210, 211 & 213 IPC & l0 (2) of COTPA I ] l6a/21 of PS 4121 2l Artihart;r ,\] I 2(r I 2.14.121 of I'S I 3lti. 271_ 271 & I88 IP('

-123. 170 & 271 r/rv 5ll Il'C & 20 I rarspolt:rtion of bamrcd Al ro4 I sale ot gLrrka & kiraiui I 4'715 t 1l (l)Nrl ntla 245i21 of PS (R) t3 At & 2 Kltanruram of(()1P.,\ rltkar l 4315 I t

) l.;l t t ! l' \,, I 5' /7 '1 r// (!: /,,ri! /, (.,\I,EN D.\II (]ASI.,S 15l i ltl ol I .\.r\ll( .

t70. l7.l & ls3. lto Il,c & 58 oI FSSA .\l I ransportatiotl ()f banned zardit protlucts It l5l ll) 271 & )7a IPC & 59 ol'

t,ssA. 1006 l5lS lq ol I-.{.1\1F(.

Sale ol zartla illcgallv l7l.l lq of \v ,\( \t\l l{)'J.

t5r t0 I0 Transporlation of banncd zarda

420. 210 & l7l IPC & 58 of FSSA I 155 l() l rry!l I )71 )? 1 116 & 420 IPC & 20 (r) of COI'PA ;1717/ l3 of XI AN.II!I, Sec.had 3l Sale of prohibitcd gutka ard chcwing tobaccQ products r6t/10 I .\t &:

Transpoltation of Amber gurka pockets I88, 270 & 271 IPC rt l(, ( l:t..

It.

5316 l0 ] Jagli't _l I 16 ll) rrf .IF('I\'I.

Dcrarkortr.ia Sale ofbanned tobacco and gutka products 420 & 273 IPC l.l Al & l .1491{ I I I 963'19 of 120 & 273 rPc & 20 (iD of corPA.2ool Al ro -l Transporralion of tobacco and I gutka producls I --T-- f .I IJC'\,I, l\4ir1,alguda 1500,I l 188, 270 & 273 IPC, 20 (2)ol COTPA, 3ofEDA& 5l (b) of DMA -l5l l0 t,lXXV MN4C.

lbrrhirnfalJn Storagc ofbanned gutka aDd other tobacco products illegally for sale At & l I50q't r 6ll 19 r,f X-XV N4IVIC, I t88,2-t0,2't3 & 420 tPC & 20 (2) of COI'PA I Al 1() li Supply of gutka and othc. tobacco products 151.1/l I 'I ralrsportalion ol ArDtrcr tohacco Al & 2 212 & 2'73 tPC & 20 (2) r/w, 7 (2) of CO'IPA l 547i21 ot PJMFC.

Gaj rvel 509i20 of Spl.l'CR Mt$ile Court-cLrrllJMI]C, Adilabad 4070,': I I i 210 & 273 rPC & 20 (2) r/w 7 (2) of COTPA Transportation ofpan nrasala and banned gutka ll lr-) I 3q Al k) 5 5 llrl0 of Spl.l'CR Mobile 270,27t,272 & 2'73 r/w 34 fransponation ol'cotlon secds and \l I,,-l -10 .llleI

(t t.t i t tll \,' l::,,t irr'/r.f rr',lr IP( Scc. i ol l I),\ bann.ti gutka Cr)[r t-aurlt- .INI I (.

Adr llbad STC No.20/2I of IV AMMcuul-lv AJ(',I.

IP( & Scc.llr (1)_ r0 (l) i,t AI & 2 Iranspo atrort ol banned lobacco rnd !utka .11 4 I .11) I I C]O I PA L.lJ. Ne itr 8l()i I I of IAJI\1FC.

Kharnmanr accLrsed Il{r & 17.} IPC & lo (ll ,)l c( )t, tA 188, 272 & 213 IPC & 2ct

(2) & 5 trl'

COTPA 1)urihasc and salc .,l'banncd gutka 4l7l' I I .11 l Salc o!'totracco producls in his shop and disobe),ing the rulcs inrposcd by Govt. in Not.No.505il'SS I /2 l.(h.6.1.21 6167/21 of XVII ACMM.

Nanrpally ,1i .1 I 9.1 I I sole accused l291ti 2l of PJMFC.

Klranrmaut 270 & 17.] IP(' & lo (l) of( O I l'r\ I ransp,rrlation ol funbcr gu(ka .\l & l 14.

4216, )t I I o,rloo 819/l I of P.II\4I:C, Khammam Ar & 2 I ranspol (alion ol gutka-/pan masala 42l0r l I il,r Al & 2 108/2 I of AJMI'C, Asifabad 537t20 of AJMFC.

Nirnral l I I)r,rsr'ssion of tobacco products illcgally lirr sale 170 &t73 IPC 416 r 'l l l'urth.r.e and.alt otprohihited I ='*r'u"l---_-] Sole accused -do1'7 4612 r r I 622119 of AJMI.C.

Nirnral I'osscssio[ ot gutka packcts at bus staud lirr salc illegally .Al .\i l 4622t)l do .l ll 4ll/20 of AJMt'C.

Nirrnal A] -do rrrv 14 IP( & l0 (2) ol-( O I I'A Traniportatiol of l)irored tobacco products rl6ll,l I 2.

Hcard Mr. M.A.K. Mukhced, Mr. Gaianand Chakravarthy, Mr. K. Surender, Mr. Praveen Kuttlar Veerjala, Ms. P. Radhika, Mr. Srinivas Reddy Balakisti, Ms. C. Sunitha Kurnari, Mr. Kondadi Ajay Kurnar, Mr. S.M. Subhan. Ms. N Arthi, Mr'. Y. llala Murah, Mr. Boggula llaju. Mr. S Chandrasekhar, Mr. V. Yadukrishna Sainath. learned counsel

Kl t { ,.1 l, \r, r j I i,/ .lr,-'ll ,\ l!r1. , appearing on behall' ot' rcspcctivc petitiorrers antl lcarrlcd ['ublic Prosecutor appcaring or-r behalt' o f rcspondents - State'

3. 'Ihe question involvcd in all the above matters is one and the same and, therefor-e, the sarnc are disposed of by way of this common order.

4. The main allegations against the petitioners - accused are that they were transporring, possessing' storing' selling and purchasing the bannecl prodtrcts lir'' tobacco / tambaku I gutka I khaini / zarda /pan masala respectively' The ofl'ences alleged against the petitioners arc uncler Sections - 188' 270' 269'2'11'2'72' 273,328,336 & 420 read u'ith i4 and 5ll of tlre Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'll'C'); Sections - 20 (l)' 20 (2) and 5 read with T(2) and 7 (3) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act' 2003 (for short 'COTP Act'); Sections - 58 and 59 of th€ Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (fbr short 'irSS Act'); Section - 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 (tbr shorl'ED Act') and Section - 51

S (b) ,tl' thc [)isaslcr Marragctrteut Act, 200-i (lirl sltort l)S ,,\ct) respectiveli.

5. t he respcctive learncd counsel appcaring on behall'of thc petitioners in the above criminal petitions would subn.rit that the corltcnts ol'complaint / charge sheet lacks the irrgrcilients of the ollcnccs allcged against the accused. For the oll'errccs under the provisions oIFSS Act, only Food Safety Officcr is having pr)wcr tr) initiate crinrinal proceedings against accused ancl thc policc arc not having any p()wcr to registcr a casc lbr thc oflenccs unrlcr thc provisior.rs of IrSS Act. There is no inducemcnt bv thc petitioners and, therclirre, of'flncc under Section - 420 o1' I PC' rloes not al'ise . According 10 them, the contents of complaint / chargc shcet are also lacking the ingredients of the offences undcr Scctions - 2(r9, 270,271,272,273,328 and 336 ofIPC i) According to them, there is no violation of Sections - 20 (l),20 (2) and 5 r'cad with 7 (2) and 7 (3) of thc CO'|P Act. Thc Invcstigating ()fllcels / Complainants without firllorvinq the procedule laicl down under the Code of Criminal Pioccdure. 1973

L!,..t ('l l' \ ' i:: il :ttlit ,tl lattlt ( {br shorl 'Cr.P.C.'), havc registcred the cascs tbr the olfbnce urrder Section - 188 oi IPC and laid charge sheet against the accused' Necessary ingredients to attract the provisions of Section - 3 of the ED Act and Scction - 5l (b) ol the DNI Act arc lacking in the complaint / charge sheet.

ii) With the above said subrllissions, the respective learned counsel sought to quash the proceeclings in lhe atbresaid crimes / calendar cases.

6. On the other hand, Iearned l)ublic Prosecutor ref-erring to the principle laid down in the State of N{aharashtra v' Sayyed Hassan Sayyed Subhanr by the tlon'ble Strpreme Court and in Ganesh Pandurang Jadhao v. 'fhe State of Maharashtra2 and Anand Ramdhani Chaurasia v. Thc State of Maharashtras by the Bombay High Court would submit that police are having power to register cases under various plovisions ol IPC, COTP Act, ED Act and DM Act. Tlrere is no irregularity in registcring crimes, seizing material including the vehicles and laying charge sheet '. 2ol8 AIR (sc) 5348 '? 2ol6 cri. L.J. 24ol '. 2019 SCC orrl-ine Bom l857

l0 t,t I ( rl t \.,, l;t,,t ',/ , (\ /,ri/1, agaiust resl)cctivc rccuscd irt thc attrlcsaid crirues I calctrclitr cascs According to hinr. thc accused were transpotling, posscssing. storing. sclling and lrulchasing thc banncd products lt:., tolracctr, tanrbaku r gutka i khaini I zarda / pan tnasala respcctivcly According to him, thc accused have to face either investigatiotr or trial and prove their tnuocence, and instead of doing so, they have filed the prcsent crirninal petitions under Section - 482 ol'C'r.l'.Cl whiclr cannot lre considered at this stage i) With the above said submissions, lcarned Public Prosccutor sor.rght to dismiss the above criminal petitions.

7. [n vicw o1'the above rival subrnissions, it is appositc to extract the relcvant provisions of IPC, COTP Act, FSS Act, tjD Act and DM Act. which are as under:

ITEI,I.,\',\N'I PROVISIONS UNDER IPC "ltltl. Disobedicnce to order duly promulgated b1'public scrvant. Whoever, knowing that, by an ordcr prornulgatcd by a public serr.ant lawfully empowercd to plornulgatc sLlch order. Irc is clirectcd to abstaiu lrom a certain act, or to taks cefiain ordcr rvith certain property in his possessioti ot undcr his nranagorncnt, disobcys suoh dircction, shall, il' such disobeclicncc causcs or tends to causc ()bstfLtctiorl.

^t l { , r l' \ /.i ' ,,/ 't):tt \) htk h alrn()yilllcc or injury. or risli ot'ohstrtlctioll. illll](r\rllcc (rl' injury, kr any polson larvlllly sllrplo)'ed. bc puni'hcd $itlt sirnple inrprisonment li)r a lcnl u'lticlt nritl' crtettd ttr orle month or witlr line which may extetrtl to two httndrc(l ruPcos. or rvith hoth: and il'such tlisobcrlicncc causcs ()I llcrrds to causc danger to human life, hcalth or salcty, or catlses ()r tcnds to cause a riot or affray, shall be punished with irnprisonrrent of either description ftrr a tcnlt s'hich niay extend to six rnonths, or wilh fine rvliich may ertend to one thousand rupces, or rvith both.

Expltrnation. lt is tlot necessary that thc ot'ftnder should intend to produce ltann, ttt coutctlplato his disobedience as likely to ptoduco harm. It is suUicictrt that hc knows of the order which he disobcl's, and that his disobcticnce produccs, or is likoly kr produce, hanll. Illustration An order is promulgated by a public servant lawlirlly empowercd to protrlulgilto such order, directing that a religious prttcession sltall not pass dorvtr a ccrtain street. A knowingly disobeys the ortler, antl thcreby causes dangcr of riot. A has comrnittcd thc ofl'encc defined in this scction."

"269. Ncgligent act likcly to spread infection of disease dangerous to life.-Whocver unlarvfully or negligently cloes any act which is, and which hc knows or lras rcason to bclievc to bo, likely to spread the inf-cction ol any diseasc dangerous to lifc, shall be punishetl lvith ilnpl-isottlrient ol eitlrer dcscriptiot.t tirr a terur which mat' cxtctltl to six lnonths. or rvith finc, or with both."

i,t t ( // 1) \{, / i',,r ', ', '\ l'./n ii "270. trlalignan( act likch' to sprcad infcction of discasc dattgcrous to lifc.- Wltocvcr rnalignantll' docs anl act rvhich is- antl u'lticlr he ktrolvs or lras reasotr kl believe to be' likclv to splcad thc inf-cction of any diseasc dangcrous ttr lilc. shall bc punished with itnprisontrtent ol cithcr descriptiou ti)[ a terln which rnay extend to two ycars' ol' with line. or rvitlt lxrth."

"271. Disobetlicncc to quarantine rulc Whoevcr knolr,ingly clisobeys any rule made and prornulgated by thc fior ernrrct.tt lbr llutting any vessel into a state of quarantinc' or li.t' rcgulating thc iutercourse of vessels iu a statc of quarantrnc rvith the shore or with other vessels' or fi)r rcgulating the intcrcoursc bctween places where atr irrtcctious disease prevails atrd other placcs, shall bc punishcd ,,vith irnprisontnent of either descliption firr a tcntt rvhich utay exteud to six tnonths, or with fine, or with both " "272. Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale - Whocvcr adulteratcs any article of food or drink, so as t<t rlrakc such arriclc noxious as food or drink, intcnding to scll such articlc as food or drink, or knowing it to be likely that thc sau.]c rvill be sotd as food or drink, shall bc punished vvith irnprisonment ol either description for a tenn which may cxtend to six months, or with fine which may cxtetld to one thousand rupees, or with both."

"27.1. Salc o[ noxious food or drink' Whocvcr sells' ol' o ['fils or exposcs ior salc, as food or drink, any articlc which hirs becn rctttlcrcd or has hecome noxious' or is in a state urrtlt tbr lbotl or drink, knr:rwing ol having reason to believc tlrat tlrc sautc is uoxious as lood or drink, shall trc puuishccl

lr i'i / ( )ll' \. /:',,1 t))t),1 [l,l] rvith iml;risonrlent of cithcr descriplion lirl a tenn u,hich luray cxtend to six nrontlis, or rvith finc rvhich mav e\lend to one thousand nrpees. or u,ith both."

"328. Causing hurt bv mcans of poison, clc., rvitlr intent to comnrit an offence. Whoever adrninistel's t() or ciruses to bc takcn by any pcrson any poison or any str.qtelving. intoxicating or unrvholcsome drug. or other thing rvith intent to cause hurt to such pcrson, or with intcnt to commit or to facilitate the cornmission of an ofli:nce or knowing it to be likely thal hc will thcreby cause huft, shall be punislrcd *,ith imprisonrnent of either description firr a telrn rvhich rrrav extend to ten years, and shall also bc liable to tine." "336. Act cndangcring lifc or personal safcty ol'others.

Wliocver docs any acl so rashly or negligently as kt entlanger human life or lhe pcrsonal safi:ty ofothers, shall be punished witlr irnprisonment o1'either dcscription lbr a tcnn wliich rnay extend to thrce months, or with [ine rvhich ntay extend to trvo hundred and fifty rupees, or with bolh." "420. Chcating and tlishonestly inducing dclivcry of propcrty.- Whocvcr chcats and thcreby <lishoncstly intluces the person deceived to deliver any propcrty to any pefson, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anlhing which is signed or sealed, and whiclt is capable ofbcing converted into a valuable security, shall be punished rvith imprisonment of either descripti<ln fur a tcn.n which rnay extend to sevcn ycats, and shall also be liablc to finc."

l+ LI I I rij .t i,',,1 i,r'rr\:r,rtulr "--1-1. Acts tlone bv scvcral pcrsons in lirrthcrance of conlllron itrtetrtion. Wltctt a oril'uillal act is done lty scr.'elal pclsons irt tut'thcratroc of thc cotntnotr intention of all. cach ol suclt llersons is liable fbr that act itl thc sautc nlilrncr ts it' it rr crc donc lry hirn alonc." "51 1 . l'unishment for attempting to commit offcnccs punishahlc sith imprisonmcnt for lifc or othcr imprisonmcnt. Whoevcr attempts to colnmit au offeuce punishable by this C'odc rvith imprisontnent lbr life or inrplisonnrent. ol to cause suclt rtn offence to be committed. anrl in srrclr attclnpt does any act towards thc cornrnission of the oftcnce- shall.

rl,herc no cxl)r€ss provisiou is made by 1l1is (otlc lbr thc punishrnent ol'such attempt, bc punished with irrrprisonmcnt of any description provided for the oflcncc. lirr a telm wlrich tray extend to onc-half of tlre irnpr isorrrncnt firr lifb or, as the case may be, oneJlalf of the lon-scsl tenl of inrprisonmcnt provided lor that of'fetrcc, or with sLreh lirre as is provided for thc offence, or with both." RELITVANI'PltO YISIONS UNDER CO'I'P AC'I "5. Prohibition of advertisement o[ cigarettes and other tobacco products.

li L! r (, /. /' \,, l.r ',,/ .ltt'tr.l /r,rt,/r l)r()lnr)1CS lltc Lt-sC (lI al)ll5Lltllllli()ll ()l' ei!ilrcltcs ()I llll\ (rtllCl tobauert ptod rtels.

(l) No l.rerson- lirr rurv tlitccl or irtLlitecl pcerttlilttl bcrrctit. : llt ll 1a) display, cause to (lisplay, or pcrrnit or author ise kr display any advenisettrent olcigarettcs ot any other ttrbilcco prodttct; ol'

(b) sell or causc to sell, or pcnnit or authorise to sell a lllm or video tape cotrtaining advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or (c) distribute, cause to distribute, or permit or authorise k) distributc b the public any leatlet, hand-bill or docutnent rvhich is ot rvhich contaitrs an adverlisement of cigarcttcs or any othcr tobacco product; or (d) erect, exhibit, fix or retain upon or over any land, building, rvall, hoarding, frame, post or structure or upon or in any vchiclo or shall display in any manner whatsoever in any placc any advertiscmellt ol cigarettcs or any other tobacco product:

Provided that this sub-section shall not apply in relation to (a) an adverlisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product in or on a package containing cigarettes or any otller tobacco product;

(b) advertiscrnent of cigat'cttcs or any otl.rer tobacco product which is tlisplayed at the entrance or inside a warelrtluse or a shop where cigarcttcs and any other tobacco products arc olfered for distribution or sale.

(3) No person, shall, under a contract or otherwise prolnote or agree to promote the use or consumption of- (a) cigarettes or any othcr tobacco product; or (b) any trade mark or brand narne ofcigarettes or any otl.ler bbacco ptoduct in exchangc lor a sponsorsliip, gift, prize or scholarship given or agrecd to be given by another person'" "20. l'unishnrcnt for failurc to give spccificd warning lnd nicotine and tar contcnts.'

T() Ll t 1/ /' \,, / i',)t '):u<\ b,lrh ( l) \n\ pcrs(rr) u'lto protluccs or uranutitctutes cigarcttcs or t(rhirec{) l)ro(lucts. $'hiclt do trttt contaitl. citllet ou thc packirgc or orr tltcir lahcl. the specitietl u'anring and thc nicotinc and tar c()r'rtcnts. shall in thc casc ol tirst convictiott bc punishablc rvith imprisontuent lbr a tcmr rvhich tnay extcnrl to tw() ycarc, or with linc which tnay extend to tivc thousand rupees. or rvith both, and lbr the sccoud or subsequcnt conviction. with inrprisonment for a tcnn which may extcnd to fivc ycars and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupccs.

(21 Anv pcrson rvho sclls or distributcs cigarettes or tobacco products rvhich do not contain cither ou thc packagc or on thcir hbcl. tlrc spccilicd wamilg and thc nicotinc ar.rd tat contt:nts shall in the casc of tirst conviotion be punishable with irnprisonrrcnt firr a tenn, which may extet.td to one year. or u,ith Ilnc rvhich nray cxtcnd to one thousand rupees, or rvrth lroth, and. fbr the seconrl or subsequent conviction, rvith iruprisonrrent lor a tonn which rmay cxtend to two years and u,ith Iine which lnay sxtend to tluee thousand rupces." "7. Rcstrictions on trade and commcrce in, and production, supply and distribution of cigarcttes and other lobacco products.- ( I ) No persorr sliall, directly or indirectly, produce, supply or distribute 6 cigarettcs or any odrcr tobacco products unless cvcry packagc of cigarettes or any other tobacco products produced. supplied or distributed by l.rirn bears thcreon. or on its labcl such specr fied waming including a pickrrial waming as mav be prescrihcd.

(2) No pcrson shall carry on trade or corrmclcr: in cigarettes or anv otlrer tobacco ploducts unloss every package of

lr ,\1.1 ( rt lt \1, l-.: tlt :t),t) tl i,trt it cigarcttcs ()r any other t()l)ilcco ltl()dtlcts sol(1. stlpplied oI (listril)uted h1, hini bears thcrcon. or on its label, the specilied u anring.

(3) No person shall inrporl cigarettcs or any other tobacco products l'or distribLrtion or supply lbr a valuable consideration or lbr salc in lndia unless cvery package of cigarettes or auy other tobacco products so irnported by him bcars thcreon, or oll its label, thc specificd waming.

(4) The spccilied rvarning shall appear on not less than onc ol'thc lalgcst panels of the- package in whioh cigarcttes or any other tobacco products have been packed tbr distribution, salc or-supply for a valuablc considcration.

(5) No pcrson shall, directly or indirectly, produce, supply or distribute cigarottes or any othcr tobacco products unlcss cvery package of cigarettcs or any other tobacco products produccd, supplied or distributed by him indicates thereon, or on its [abcl, the nicotine and tar contents on each cigarctte or as the oase may bc on othcr tobacco products along with the nraximum perrnissible limits thereofi Provided that the nicotine and tar contonts shall not exceed the maximum pcrmissiblc quantity thereof as rnay be prescribed by rules made under tl.ris Act."

Rr,.t.r,.\ ,\N'I PRO\/ISIONS UNDIiR F.S.S. Act: "5E. Penalty for contraventions for lvhich no specific pcnalt5 is provided.- Wltoe\ cr contravcnes any provisions of this Act or the rules or regulations made thereundcr, tirr thc contravention of rvhich no pcnalty has been separately

iN t' l' I t t i l) \/, I::,,1 :t 't) .\ l,.tk h I)ro\:idc(l in this ('haptcr. shall bc liablc 1o r pcnalty rvhich rlay c,r.lcgtl tp tq,1 laklt rr.rpccs."

"59. l'unishntcnt for unsafe foocl.-Arll' persotl tt'lttt. whcthcr by himsclf or by any other persou oll his behalf. nranulircturcs lirr salc or stores or sclls or distlibutcs tlr irrprrrts anv articlc of'lood tirr hutnau consumption rvliiclr is unsat'e. shall be punishablc.- (i) u'herc such failurc or coutraventiotl does llot result in injury, rvith irnprisoutncnl ftrr a tcnn rvhich uray extcnd to six rnonths and also r.vith llnc rvhich lnay extend to one lakh Iupces:

(ii) rvhcre such lailurc ()r c()llttavcntiot t rosults in a notlgricr ous iniury. with inrprisonment lbr a tcntr which rnay extend to one ycar and also s,ith fine rvhich n.ray ertend to thrcc lakh mpees;

(iii) rvtrerc such failurc or coutravcntion rcsults in a gricvous injurv. uith irnprisontncnt fbr a temt rvhich rnay cxtend to six ycars and also u,ith llne which tnay extend to tlve lakh rupocs;

(iv) whcre such failurc or contravention rcstrlts in death, with imprisonrnent fbr a tcnn which sha[[ not be less than sevcu years but which may extcnd to imprisonment for lile and also rvith firre which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees." REI,EVANT PROVISION UNDER E.D. ACT:

"3. Penalty. Any pcrson disobeying any regulation or order madc under this Act shall be deerned to have committcd an offencc punishablc under section 188 of the Indian Penal Codc (45 ol' I 860 )."

l() A/ I ( t'| l'. \,, lj:,,1 )tt:t1.1 l\11' lt Rl'-l.l:\',\N I I'RO\ lSlO\ t \l)l:lt D.)1. ,\(l'l' "51. Prrnishmcnt lor obstruction, ctc.

(l)\Vhocvcr- u,ilhout leasonlblc causc (l) Whoct'cr. rvilhout reasonablc causc (t) obstructs an;' ollicer oI enrployec ol tlie Ccntral (lovernr)lcnl or tlre Statc Covcnturent, or a person authorisc'd by the Nationrl Authority or State Authority or District Authority in the discharge olhis iunctions under this Act; or (b) rctuses to comply r.r,ith any direction given by or on bchalf of thc Ccnh'al Covernlnent or the State Covemment or the National ExecutiVe Comrnittce or the State Executive Comrnittee or the Dishict Authority under this Act, shall on conviction be punisliable rvith imprisonment for a tenn rvhich may cxtcntl to onc ycar or with li.re, or rvith both, and il' sLrch obstruction or relusal to comply rvith dircctions resul(s irr loss of lives or irnrninent danger thereo-f.

shall on conviction be punishable rvith itnprisonment for a tenn which nray cxtend to two years. notes on clauses Clauses 5l (o 58 (Secs. 5l to 58) sceks to lay down what will constitute an of'fence in tcnns of obstruction of the functiot.ts under the Act, lalsc clairn fbr relief, nrisappropriation ol reliefmatcrial or l'unds, issuance of lirlse rvarning, lailure of an officer to pcrtbrrn thc duty imposcd on him under the Act without due pcmrission or lau firl e\cuse, or his connivancc al contravention of thc provisions of the Act. The clauses also plovicle filr peualtics lol thcse o[Itnces."

8. The /rs involvcd in the present petitions is no more res integra. A learned Single Judge of the High Court olJudicature at Flyderabad lor the Statc of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesl.r in Chitlurala Shyamsubde r v. State of Telangana4 had an occasion to tleal rvith the issues involved in the present criminal petitions. Afler rclelring to various provisions of IPC, FSS Act, Crl.P. No.l73l of 2018 & batch, deeided on l7.0ll.l0l8

'0 t,t t (t; i , !: ',,/'',(\ /!,/(, CO I P Act untl also tlte principle laicl tlos'n [)\; thc Al)cx C.ourl and other High ('out1s itr scveral .iudgrncllts, thc Iearnctl Singlc.ludge had liaurcrl thc issues, ri,ltich arc as utldcr: "l) Wl,cthcr lho rcspolldent/ Sub-lnsllectol ol'Policc. is oolllpelcnt to investigatc inb tl.re ofli:nce punishablc undcr Scctions 54 and 59(l ) o1' FSS Act?

2) Whether the pctitioners in alI the petitions are lound corntnitting any act wilh malicious intcntion, r.vith knowledge alld rcason to holi$,e that such act likely to sprcad thc inf'cction trf any discasc rlangerous to lil'c? And rvhcther thc petitioncrs selling ol oficring or cxposing firr sale as food or drink, any adiclc rvhiclt lras becn rcnderetl or has becornc noxious or is in a state unlit tbr fbod or drink or reason to belicve that the sarnc is noxious as lbotl or drink',' Il'so. arc they liable to be procccdecl tbr the oflbncc punishable urrder Scctions 270 atd273 IPC.'!"

9. Aficr an claborate discussion and on considel'ation of various aspccts, the lealrted Singlc Judge has held that thc police cannot takc cognizance of the offence, to investigatc into and file charge sheet against the accused therein lbr the o1'lbncc punishable under Sections - 54 and 59 (1) of' FSS Act, as they wcre not elrpo\\rered under thc said Act to launch tlte pt'osecutioll, but only Food Safctl' Olficer appointed by the Govcrnnrcnt alone is compctent to launcir prosecution fbr those two otl'ences. With the

-ll ^t..t ( t I t' \t, I \a t't :rlr tl l,nih said lindings, tlrc learttctl Singlc .lLrdgc ltas quashed thc proccedings rvhere the olltnccs zrre uncler Scctions - 54 and 59 ol IrSS Act initiated by the police

10. In thc very sarne .iuclgntent, tlre learned Single Judge further hcld that chcrving tobacco ancl khaini are not the 'food' within the deflnition of Scction - 3(i) ol the FSS Act and the manufhcture, salc or ex1-rosing lor sale of tobacco etc., is governed by the provisions o1'C( )-l [' Act, but not by l-SS Act ancl so also the provisions of IPC. TIte respontlents - policc are incompetent to investigate thc ot'f'ence lrunishable under Sections - 54 and 59 ( l) of the FSS Act an(l allegations in the charge sheet coupled rvith the statements do not disclose the cotnmission 01' the ollence punishablc uuder Scction - 213 ttl'II)C since transpofiation of noxior.rs tbod is not incluclcd untler Section - 271 ol'[PC. The act done by the accuscd thcrcin i.e., transpofiation of khaini and chewing tobacco though dangcrous to human life, it rvould not spread or infcct or cause any discasc on account ol' transportation and if tliose proclucts arc consutncd by hunran being, it would certainly cause datnitge to the liealth. l'hereltrre, transpoflation ol

\1 l ( , /'

.

, i',,/ '/ '1 \ /,,//,, khaini or clrcwing tobacco by itsell is not an ol'l'crlcc untlcr Scction - 270 ol tP('. Pan Masala is not a tobacco product to Iall rvithin the purvicw of CIO fP Act. fhcrefore, the provisions of thc COTI'} Act havc no application, thereby legistr-ation of crirnc on the ground of violation of Sections - 7 (l) (2\ (3) (5) and Section - 26 oICOTP Act is an illegality. The learned Singte Judge further held that registration of cases for the offence under Section - 20 (2) read with 7 (2) of COTP Act is illegal- With the said lindings, the learncd Single Judge has quashed the crimcs and calcndar cascs in the said judgme nt.

I l. I r.r Sri Jaganath Enterprises Eluru Vasadhi Tripati Rao v. 'l'he State of Andhra Pradeshs, a learncd Single 'lutlge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravti had also an occasion to deal with the said issue. Alter relbrring to the contentions of the respective parties therein, various provisions of IPC, FSS Act. COTP Act and relying on thc principlc laid down in Anand Ramdhani Chaurasia'r, Joseph Kurian v' State of '. 2020 ( l) ,,\L1 (( rl.) Il5 (At'll()

L! I (l//'

\,, /j',,r l,'rL( i,.rlr /r Kcralar', Sar,]'ed llassan Salr'cd Suhhanr. N,I/s. Pepsico lndia lloldings (Pvt) Ltd., r,. State of U.P.7, Sanjay Anjay Storcs r,. Union of IntliaE, Iloop Singh Ty'agi v. Statee, State of Haryana v. Bhajan [,alt0 and Chitlurala Shy'anrsu bdcr'{, the lcarnecl Single Judge has quashed the FII{s / Calendar Cases. The learned Single Judge refbning to the law laicl clown in Chidurala Shyamsubder{ held that despite the said authoritativc pr-ollouncement of larv, status quo continucs. Tlrc said.judgment attained linality. Even then, the police arc registering casr-s against accuscd on the very same allegations fbr the very sanrc off-ences.

i) l(ef-erring to the provisions ol' Scctions 153, 188, 269,270, 271, 272,273, 284,328, 351 ol'IPC, the learned Judge in Sri Jaganath lintcrpriscs' helcl that the otl-ences registcred under the said Sections arc not nraintainable. It lurther hetd that the provisions of the COTI'Act can only be pressed into service in the limited circumstances only where there is violation of Sections - 4,5,6,7 and l0 oithe ('Ol'P Act. By ref-erring to the principle o.

7. 20l I (2) crimes 250

8. 2017 scc online cal I (1323 '. 2oo2 c.l.t-.J. :8;z Io. 1992 Supp (l) sCC 135

l Lt ..t i tI i '',, i.\ ',,; ',,',,(\ /',rn /r laitl cltru u bv thc Apex Ciourt in llhajan [.alr(] antl NI/s. I'cpsico Intlia I loklings (Pvt) Ltd.7. the lean.red Singlc .ludgc lras quashed thc piocceclings in various crinres / calendar cascs.

12. Anothcr learned Single Judge of thc Iligh Court ol Andhra Pradcsh at Amaravati in V. Nageswara Rao v. State of Andhra Pradeshrr had also an occasion to cleal with thc said issuc and agrcecl rvith the principle laid dorvn irr Chidurala Shvanrsuhdcra.

l-1. In Sayvcd Hassan Say1,s6 Subhanr, thc Apex ('ourt u,hile dealing with legality of the ordcr passed by thc Llonrbay IIigh Court in a batch ol criminal writ petitions and crinrinal applicrrtions. rvhich were liled chaltcnging thc reuistration of [;lRs tbr tlrc oflcnccs undcr Sections - 188,272,273 an<l328 ollPC ancl Sectiorrs - 2(r and 30 of the FSS Act where there is an allegatiorr ol transportation and sale of Gutka / Pan Masala etc., held that tlie .iucluurcnt ol l]onrbay tligh Coufi is contrary to the provisions ol' the Acl and Iarv laid down by it. With the said linding, the Apcx Courl r'ernittccl the rnatter to the Bombay High Court fbr fi'csh rr.l0l{) suprcr e ( \P) 148

, (i i/'\,,i I I ,,i ,'i r r/, r\ /',r/. /r ^i consideration on the issuc tlrat rr'hether the alirresaid ollcnccs arc made out in the Irllls. u,hich arc subjcct rnattcr ol'tlrc cascs pending belbre the Bombay lliglr (-ourt.

14. In view olthe authoritative pronouncenrent of larv in the aforesaid judgments, as discussed above, coming to the facts o1- thc cases on hand, the allegations against the accused ir-r respective cases are tlansportation, possessiorl, storage, sale and pulchase of banned products vr., tobacco / tarnbaku / gutka / khaini / zarda / pan masala etc., respectively. In Chidurala Shyamsubderr, the leamed Single observed that transporlation of chewing tobacco or khaini or pan masala do not constitute an oll-ence punishable under Section - 210 of IPC and that manulacturing of pan nrasala is not included in Section - 273 of IPC and, therefbre, the sarne is not an offence since it is not a noxious lbod. The learned Single Judge has further observed in the said judgment which is as under: "....The act done by the petitioners i.e., transpofta(ion ol khaini and cherving tobacco though dangerous to hurnan [ilc, it woulcl not sprcad or int-ect or cause any cliscase on account of transporlation and if those producls

l(t al1 colrsuured by lruruan bcing. it $'oultl ccrtainly' causc damage to thc hcaltlr.

'[-hclelbrc. tl'ansportation ol klraini or cheu'itrg tobacco is not by itsclf is not au of'tence uuder Sc,:tion - 270 ol'IPC and it would lall u,ithin Scction 270 ol IPC."

15. Scction - 272 ot'IPC makes punishable an ofl'cnce by a person. u h,r urlulterates any articlc ol- food or drink. Tllcrclbre, the sa rl sccliLr:r ri oulrl only corne illto play if food or drink is adultcratccl. I hcle is no definition of 'adulteration' in II)C. The dellnition ot".rdulterant' is lound in tl're provisions olthe FSS Act. Section - I (I) (a) of the FSS Act deals with 'adulterant' rvhich lurr:aus a nratcrial rvhich could tnake the 'food' unsalb or substarrdrrrd or nris-brandecl. According to Section - 272 ol- lPC. il a rnaterial rs useci to make the lood unsafb/sub-standard or misbrandcd, then only the oflbnce would be attfacted. Wtercas, as discussed supra, the allegation in the present batch of cases is with rcgard to transportation, possessiorl, storagc, sale and purchasc ol banrrctl products li:.. tobacco / tarnbaku / gutka / khaini I zarda I pan nrasala ctc., respeclively. Therefbrc, according to this Cour1, the saiil allc-ration does not tall within the ambit of'Section - 212 ol

)rLi i (jll \r, /,il,r'r,1/,( /,,Irlr ll)C--. 'llreretbrc, Iagrce with thc principle laid dorvn by the Iearncd Singlc Judges of the IIigh Court ol Andhra Praclesh in Chidrrrala Shyamsubdert, S.i Jugnnuth Enterprisess and V. Nagesrvara Rao'1.

1 (r. tn Joscph Kuriarn6, thc I lon'ble Strprcnrc Court hcld that lbr Section - 272 IPC to be attracted, the lbllor'ving should be present. (l ) That the article involvcd was food and drink Ineant to bc consurned by live persons; (2) that the accused adulteratcd it and the adultcration rcndered it noxious as a 'fbod or drink'; (3) that the accused knew at the time o1'adulteration thal hc rvould sell the articlc as lood or drink and knew that such article cannot bc stlld as fbod or drink. The Hon'ble Supreme Courl clcarly held that the olTer.rce is completed on the introduction of the adulterant. 'Adulterant' would mean that a material which is tnixed to nrakc the 'food' unsafe or drink unsat'e. In the present case on hand, tobacco is not a food or drink and what is stated to be mixed in it is not clearly established by any cogent ntatcrial as an 'acltllteranl' lirr tlre olTence under Section - 272 IPC to be pr-essed into se rvicc.

t\ iit t ( ti/'

\,' i)' t)r 'tt'ttt\1,,tlrh Il. .,\s lar us Scction - 328 of II'C is conccrncd. in lhe sanrc .judgrnerrt it u as hclcl as tollows:

''10. ln rrrtlcr t(r pr1)\'e ollence undcr Section 328 the prosccution is rcqurrerl kr pro\ o tllat llrc substancc in tlucstion rvls a poison. or any stupclj rng. intoxicating or unwholesome drug etc, that the accuscd irdrlinislcrcrl llrc substancc to the cornplainant or causcd the complainarrt to takc such suhstance, that he did so with intent to causc hurl or knorving it to be likely l9 that he would thercby causc Irud. or rvith the intention to conmit or facilitate the oornmission of rn olfcncc. It is- tlrcrctirrc. essential lbr thc prosecution to pnrvc tltat thc accusctl rias dir-ectly responsible for adrninistcring poison ctc. or c;rusing it to be taken by any person, through another. . .. . .." Tobacco tloes not Ilt into this deflnition.

lli. Scction - 273 of IPC deals with sale of a noxious t-ood or drink, anri irs pcr rvlrich. whoever sells, or ot'fers or exposes for sale, as lirorl or- drink, an1, article which has been rendered or has become noxious, ol is in a state untlt for food or drink, knowing or having rcason lo lrelicve that the same is noxious as lood or drink, shall lre punishcrl rvith irnprisonnrent specitied therein. 'l'hcrelbre, if a person t,lli'rs lbr salc a "lbod or drink" any arlicle which lras become noxir.lrs or is in a state ol unfit for "food or drink". -I'hus, the said sccti()n \\'ould applv, rvhcn an a(icle which has bccome

l,) Li t C1!.!' \,, l-<: ,,1 :tt:tt ,\ l\r.tt n()\ior.rs or \\'hich has beCn rcndcrecl noxious. It also applics to lbocl ol clrink only. As held in Sri Jaganath Enterpriscss. thc u,or<l 'noxious' is rrot defined in IPC or in ['SS Act- As per the dictiorrary mcaning, the word 'noxious' is harmful, deletcrious' injurious, poisonous etc. As stated above, the allegation in the entile batch of present criminal petitions is with regard to transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase ol'banned products lt., tobacco / tambaku / gutka / khaini I zatda I pan masala etc., respectively. Therefore, according to this Court, the contents of the complaint/charge sheet lacks the ingredients ol' Section - 273 of IPC.

19. As lar as section - 188 IPC is concerned , as per the scttled law on the subject, before an accused is charged, there must be; an order duly promulgated by the public servant; the pubtic seruant must have the lawful authority to promulgate the order; the person llouting the same should have knowledge about the order ilirecting hinr to abstain from the act; he must disobey the said orclcr with the knowledge; and such disobedience ot the cluly promulgate'd order sl-rould cause a danger to the hurnan lifc etc. ln

-to Kl I () I | \,,1 i<:.tt :tt:t1t\. t\tklt Boop Singh I'vagi' a l)ivision l]errch ol Allahabad High (butt hekl that riglrt to pror.nulgarc thc ordinance/ordcr is also att issuc which is treing raised. bccausc under thc FSS Act, the Courniissioncr ol' []cxrd Sai'ety al'-rne has thc authority to pass the orders only ilttre arlicle ol'fbo<i' can causes dangcr or is injurious to healtli.

20. ln N.-l'. Ranta Rao v.'l'he Statc of A'P', rep' by Public Prosecutorr2 rvhile tlealing with thc off'ences under Sections - 188 and 283 ol'IPC. thc lealrrcd Single Judge of the cornbined High Court o1'Attdhra l)radesh he ld as under:

"5) Even il' thc allegation that the petitioner conductctl ltublic llreetings at three road .junctions contrary to thc permission accorded lor conductitrg ol a public meeting only at one spocificcl place is lrue, such a direction under Section J0 of the Police Act, 1861 could have lreon givcn only by the Superintendent or the Assistant Supcrintendent of Police of the District but not by any of their subordinates. If such a pert.uission is grattted under Section 30 of the Police Act. I861 and is violated, Scction 195 ( I ) (a) ol Codc ol' Criminal Procedure rr. Criruinal Pclirirrr No.53ll ol-l()0(). dc.r(lc(l orl t? 09 2009

( r r r, \/, / i r /,r 'ir )/r r( l,irr.,l nr:u)(l.tcs that thc complaint in this regartl has to be rnatlc hv tlre public setvaut cotrcerned or sorne trtlrcr l)crson to wltont suclt a ptlblic sr'rvar)t is adrn in istrat ively subordinate to errable arrv Court ltl takc cogtrizartce ol' atl ollcnce under Scction I88 of Co<le of Crirninal I'rocedute. In the ptcsent case, the charge sheet \\,as filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, who coultl not have besn the authority to grant pcrrnissiorr lbr thc public lneeting and therclore, the complaint/charge sheet is in i,iolation ol'thc rnandatory provision of Section I 9-t( I Xa) of Code ol Crirninal Procedure.

6) 'fhat apa(, the oflence alleged to have beeu conrrnitterl under Scction 283 of the Indian Penal Corle by the petitioners ancl others is ohviously in consequence to the alleged ot'fence under Section 188 of Indian Penal ('otlc antl is not an independent of the sarne. []ven otherwise, the conduct of public rneeting at three road junctions or obstruction to the traffic could not have been considered as causing any danger or injury to any person. In so thr as the obstruction in any public way is concerncd, rvhich can also be covercd by Scction 2ll3 of the Indian Penal Code, the clrargc sheet citcs only one witness to speak

,,!' I t t, i"\t) ii-/I'rr.//r\ 1,,/r., about thc traltic -jaur c:ruscd by lhc |oat[ sho$,. But. rvhcn tlle corl(luct ol- the putrlic rlreeting at lcast at one placc has hccrr pernrittetl arrtl ilthc gathering fbr that public nrceting rcsultetl in an1, irrcorrvenience by rvay ol obstructing thc tralTic. tlrc samc cannot be considered to be rvith necessary guilty rrrerr.s,'('a to construe tlle existence of an oflence punishable under lndian Penal Code. Under tlrc circunrstances, none of ttre ol'fences allcged can be saitl to have any reasonable basis and in any view. the cornplaint/charge sheot bcing in violation ol Section 195 ( I ) (a) o1' Codc ol' Criutinal l)rocedure. has to thil.

7) As the conrplaint has lailed duc to its unsustainabi lity. the proccedings in their entirety have to firil. though the l" accused alone approached this Coutl by way of this Crirninal [)etition."

2l . In 'l'hota Chandra Sekhar v. 'l'he State of Andhra Pradesh, through S.I1.O., P.S. Eluru Rural, West Godavari Districtrr, whclein by lelying on various judgme nts including N.T. Rama Raolz and also the guiclelines laid dou,n by the Apex Court in Bhajan Lalrr)more parlicr,rlarly. guicleline No.6, rvhich says that rr Crinrilal l,ctiti(,n No. t5l.lS ol l()I6.dccidcdrrrr-16.I0.20l6

41./ at.t t, \t, I .' t,t :t1:tt .\ lakt) rvhere there is irn erprcss lcgal bat cngralted in any ol- the provisions ol' the Corle or thc corlcerned Act lunder rvhich a criminal proccedinq is instittrted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or wherc there is a specific provision in the Code or the conccrned Act, providing efficacious remedy to redress the grievance ot'the party, it was held that the proceedings in the said C.C. u'ere cluashed by exercising power under Section - 482 of Cr.P.C. It rvas also turther hetd that the proceedings shall notbecontinueclcluetotechnicaldefectofobtainingprior permission undcr Section 155 (2) of Cr'P'C' and taking cognizance on the complaint tlted by V'R'O' and it is against the purpoft of Section - I 95 ( I ) (a) of Cr'P'C' 22.

Vicle Notillcation No'501/FSS-1i2020' dated 06.01.2020, the Cotnmissioner of Food Safety' Telangana Directorate of tnstitutc of Prcventive Medicine, Public Health Labs and Food (llcalth) Administration, Narayanguda' Flyderabad' restricted the rnanu f-acturc. storage, distribution, transportation and sale ofgutka / pan masala, which contains tobacco and nicotine' as ingredients aucl cherving tobacco products, like chap tobacco' pure

i+ i. | :

r t! , : , ti) , i .r .// 1\ /)'rlr,;

tobacct'r. khaini, khalra, scctttcd tobacco / ilalout'ctl totracco or by u,hatever narnc locally it is calietl packcd in sacltcts r poucltes / package in the entirc Stagc ol"l'clangaua unclcr FSS Act,2006. It is fbr one year. Vide Notification No.505iFSS-l/2021, clatcd 06.01.2021, the same was extendecl tbr onc lllore ycar. As per the intbrmation furnished and instructions received, several writ petitions were llled challenging the said Notiticatiorrs belore this Court as wcll as the Ilon'blc Supteme Court. A Division Bench of this Court declined to entcftain sonte writ petitior-rs on thc ground that the Hon'ble Supreme Court seized ol' the said issuc. It is also relevant to note that the l-lon'ble Supremc Court relnanded back the matter kr this Court. T'lrereforc, such a notification can only be issued for ernergency situatiot.

ts ancl lbr prohibiting thc distribution and sale of ar.ry article ola lbod cannot be lost sight oL There(bre, in view of the law iaid down in the above judgrnents including the judgments in Chidurala Shyamsubdern. S.i Jaganath Enterprisess and V. Nageswara Raolr. According to this Cour1, Section - Iti8 of IPC will not attract to thc allegations leveled against the petitioners herein in this batch olorinlinal petitions.

ti Il t (tl l'j \,) /;: t)t :t):0 <t ljnt,lt

23. As flr as Scction - llS ol'll,C is conccrned. it deals rvith causing hurt by ureans o['poisor.r. ctc., rr,ith intent to corllriit an ol]'ence. As pcr thc sairl plor isior-r. u,hoei,er adrninistcrs to or. causes to be taken by' any person any poison or any stupelying, inloxicating or unrvltolcsonte clrug. or othcr thing with intent to cause huft to such persoll. ol rvith intcnt to contmit or to facilitate thc commission olan ollcncc or knou,ing it to bc likety that hc will thereby causc hun, shall be punislrcd x,ith irlprisonment of either description tbr a terrr rvhich ruav extend to ten years, and shall also be liabte to flne. 'l'l.rerelirre, there should be adrninistering poison, intoxicating etc.

, with intcnt to cause hun to such person or with intent to commit or to thcilitatc thc corrntission o{'an off'ence or knowing it to be likely that hc rvill thereby causc hurt. As stated above, the allegalions in the entire batch of criminal petitions are lacking. Therefore, according to this Couft, the contents of the cornplaints / charge shcets lacks the ingrcdients of Section - 328 of IPC.

-lt, 2-1 \s ljrr as Section - 3l(r ol )C is cottccrttcd. it tlclrls rvitlr an act endangelin-e [ile or pelsonal sal'ety ol othr:rs. an(l as pcr rvhich, r"lrocvcr does any act so lashly ot' ncgligcrrtll as to cnclanger lurnan lit-e or tltc pcrsotrirl sal'ct1' ol' olhcrs. shall Ire punished r,i'ith implisonment ol eithcr description lor a tcrnr rvhich rnay cxtencl to tllree rlonths, or with fine which rttay extentl to trvo hundred and tifly rupees, or with both. [n thc contlrlaitrts / chargc slrects. thcre is no suclt allegation olrash and negligent act rvhich endangers lrurnan lilb or personal saf'ety o1' othcrs. 'fhcre-lorc. accortling to this Clourt, the contcllts of the cornplaints ' cltargc shcets lacks the ingrcdients ol'Section - l3(r o1'IP('

25. As flr as Section - 420 of IPC is conce rned. it deals with Chcatrng ancl dishonestly inducing delivery ol'plopcrty. Ihcre is no such inducement either at the inception or at a later stage. Thus. the contents of complaints / charge sheet lack the ingrcdients ol Section - 420 of IPC.

16. As tar as Section - 269 of IPC is concernecl. it deals rvith negligcnt act likely to spr',cad infection oldiseasc dangerous to Iilb,

^t I ( )tl' \t) /\:,)t :tt:tttt htt.lt and as per rvhich, rr,hoevcr unlarvlirllv or neslisently rloes any act u,hich is, and u,hicl-r lrc knows or liirs rcason to bclier.c to be, Iikely to sprcad the intcction ol- anv disease clrrngcrous to Iilt. shall be punished with imprisonnrcnt o['e ithcr dcscriptior, lbr a terrn rvhich may extend to six months, or u,ith line, or rvith both. But, a perusal of the contents ol'cornplaints / charsc sheets in the prescnt batch ol'cascs, such ingrcdicnts arc lacking arrd, therelirrc. Section - 269 of IPC does not arisc in thc presL-nt [u1ch ol'cases.

27. In view of the abovc saicl tliscussion, according to this Cou, transportation, possession, storagc, sale and purchasc of tobacco products are not totally banncd in thc Statc ol'1'elangana and also in the Country. -flieretirrc, it canuot be said that Seotions - 269, 270, 27 1,272 and 273, 321i. 136 and 420 of IPC are attracted to the cases in this batch.

28. As far as the offcnces under FSS Act is concemed, as already discussed above, in Chidurala Shyamsubder{, the learned Single Judge following the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in llhajan Lalr0 helcl that the police are

incorrpctertt to takc cogttizance of the oil-ences pttnishable unclel' Sections - 5,t and 59 (l) ol thc IrSS Act, invcstigating into tlte oltenccs along with other oft'ences under the provisions ot'thc IPC' It u,as lurlher held that tiling charge sheet is a grave illegaliti'. as the Food Salbty Officer alone is competent to investigate aud to file charge shcct following the Rules laid down under Sections - 4l and 42 of FSS Act. In the present case, the police have re,eistered the crirne tbr the offences under Sections - 188, 270 and 271 of IPC. 'l-herelbre, in the present batch of cases' cntcftaining the complaints / tiling the charge sheets by the police is contraty to thc principle laid down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera29.

['ith regard to the offences under CO'I'P Act' it ls rclevant to mcntion tlie objccts and the reasons ol the said Act itsellclcarly statc that thc act is meant to prohibit the adverlisenrcnt of; and to provide for the regulation of trade and commerce in. and production, supply and distribution of.

l() 't'hc ['arlianrent urcrell, l-elt it erPcrlicnt to control the advertiscntcnt and sale ol'totracco proclucts. As rrotetl callicr in thc order. Section - 3 (p) of'the COI P Act ancl thc scheclulc therein dellnc tobacco products. Pan nrasala, gutkha and chcwing tobacccr are includccl in the definition of tobacco products. Section - 5 ol thc COTP Act deals with prohibition of adverlisenrent o1- cigarette ancl other tobacco products only. No person. u,ho is cngauecl in the production, supply or distribution ol'cieafettcs or uthcr ploclucts shalI advertise the same. Similarly, no pcrson havine thc control over a medillm can adveftise cigarcttes or tobacco products, and no person shall be a part ofany adverliserncnt.

30. Section - 7 of thc COTP Act deals w,ith the irnposition of restriction on tlre sale, trade, cor.nmcrcc o1- tobacco products unless every package of cigarette or tobacco product contains a specified warning (pictorial or othcrwise). Section - 4 of the COTP Act, bans smoking in pubtic places. ln addition, Section - 6 of the COTP Act, prohibits the sale of cigarettes or other tobacco proclucts to a person wlio is undcr tlie agc o1' l8 years are in an area within I 00 yards ol any eclucational institution

-lt t,.!l (,1/ \,,, i-,:1, ',,,( ,,1r./, l() (l ) of rhe C( ) l-l' Act lbl better allpreciation ol' thc casc attcl to rlecide thc issuc- irt (luestiolt, antl the satne is as unclcr "20. ['unishment f<rr lailrrrc to givc spccil'icd rrrrning arrtl tricotine and tar contcnts.

rl)...

(l) .Any pcrson who sells or distributes cigarettes or lobacco products which tlo not contain either on thc packagc or on their label, the specified warning and lhc nicotinc and tar contents shall in the case of first eonr iction be punishablc rvith imprisonment ftrr a lcnrr, rvhich n.ray extend to one year, or with fine rv)rich may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both. and, tbl the second or subsequent cotrviction, rvitlr iurprisonment for a term which may extend to t\\'o ycars anil with fine which may cxtend to tlrrec tlrousand nrllees."

i3. .flrus, Section - 20 of COTP Act deals with punishment lbr lailure to give specified warning and nicotine and tar contents. But, in the complaints / charge sheets, there is no allegation against the petitioners that they were carrying on trade or commcrce in contraband or any other tobacco products without label and specified wanling on the said products. In view of the same, the contents of the cornplaints i charge sheets lack the ingredients ol Section - 20 (2) of the COTP Act. Even, there is no allcgation that

l t,/ / ( tl l' '\, !) " r 'r ' ,,\ /,,r1, i the scized products do n0t cotrtain labcls rvith statutorv \\arttirlg. I'hus, registering the crirres 1br tlie said ol'fbnce against the petitioncrs is not only contrary to Section - 20 (21 ol'CO.I-P Act. but also contrary to the principle laicl down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera. In view of the same, the ol'letrce under Scction - 20 (2) of COTP Act is also liable to be quashed against the petitioners. I once again reiterate that I agree with thc principle laid down by the learned Single Judges of the lligh Court of Andhra Pradesh in Chidurala Shyamsubdera, Sri Jaganath Enterprisess and V. Nageswara Raoll.

34. Iior the fbregoing discussion and thc autholitative principle of law, Criminal Petition Nos. 3768. 3879, 4046. 4017, 409ti, 4099, 4100, 4102, 4141,4151,415't, 4182, 1181.1241, 4249, 425t, 4258, 4262, 4271, 4405, 4415, 4s42. 4615, 4640, 4681,4727, 4775 and 4825 of 2021 are allowcd cluashing the proccedings against the petitioners thereirt in the rcspcctire critncs mcntioned thcreir-r. Since the proceedings in the alirresaid Crirninal Petitions are quashcd against thc respective petitioners, the rcspcctive Station Housc Olllccrs / Investigating OIllcers arc

.l.r A]/ ( ,l l' .,, 1; ',)/ 'rr'/,.( l,/ir'll herehy tlircctcti to rcturtr thc scizcd propcrty / vchicles on propcr idcntitlcati..,rt ittrtl ycliflcation of owncrship undcr dtre acknos L-cl!ttlent.

35. Ftrrlher, Criminat Petition Nos' 152' 153' 155' 162 & 5826 ol' 2020. i498, 3s00, 3509, 3514, 4070,41 l0' 4119' 4t40' 4178,4194.4?.16, 4230,4361,4(t12,4622 and 4632 of 2021 are also allorvcd quashing the proceedings against the petitioners therein in tlte respective Calendar Cases mentioned therein' Since the proceetlinqs ate quashed' the respective petitioners are at liberly to lile appropriate applications belore the concemed Magistratc lbr retum of the seized property / vehicle and the Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law' As a sequel' miscellaneous petitions, il any' pending in all the Crirninal Petitions shall stand closed'

K. LAKSIIN'IAN, J o5r'r,lul,Y, 2o2l Notc: 1,.R. ctlpv lo be tlitrked.

(B/O.) MgL

IION.BI-I,] SItI JUS'[ICI'] K. LAI(SI{NIAN CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5619 5638, 33L4, 6926. 736L, 7391. 7455, 7543. 7873. 7aa5, a1l6' 907L t46L a7L6 9020 9044 so72. go7g. 9077. go7g. so95. 9o,9A, 9099. 9LOL, 9105. 9LO7, 9lL2, 9116. 9L2L, 9l24,9L43, 9153 9168, 920s, ,9256.9264.9266,9294, 9294. 9339.9 341.

9226.9252 9s69 9s83 9343 9368 946L 9469 9449 9587, 9599,9629. 9651, 9655, 9753, 97s9, 9764, 9784, 9793, 9a64. 10195, 10311 & 10314 0F 2021 AND 308,

469. 47L, 537, 559, 574. 598,606, 615, 627, 759, 776,

777. 78g, 7a8. 947. LL3L. L1-4L. LL92. 1205. 1206. L369' L472, L6c,6, 175L, L7:c6, L772. La53. L854. 1a63, 1-934' L944, 2oo4, 2042. 2047,2o50, 2L54, 2376, 2432, 2433, 2459. 2635,2640. 2733,2 76a, 2a22, 2a23, 298L, 3O4O, . 3110.3233.3290 3297.

3362,3373 3378, 3093. 3094 3386. 3543. 3673. 3758. 3769. 3824. 4055. 4087' 4103' 4LO4. 4L5,4. 4159. 4209,4307, 4322, 4323 & 4586 0F 2022.

COMMON ORDER:

All these Criminal Petitions are filed by the respective petitioners under Section - 482 of the Code of the Crirninal Procedure, l9'13, to quash the proceedings in the respective

Lt...t ( til' \,).^/r t'/ 't :t).1 /\!t(lt l ('r-inrcs,( alcntlar (-ascs Scssiotrs C.lscs rcgistcrecl lilr thc ol'lcllccs urtdcr.scctrons - l3S. 169. )1O.212,27i, 32ii. 336 & 420 read n'ith 34, 149.51 I crt' ll']C: Scctions - 3 (rn), 20 (2). 2l (l),21 (2). 22,1

(3) rrnd 7 (5 ) ol' the Cigarettcs ancl Othcr .fobacco Products (l'}rohibitiorr o1' Advert isctltcltt and Regulation of Tradc and Commercc. Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for shorl 'CO.l P Act') and Sections - 58 and 59 (i) of the Food Sal'ety arrd Stanclarcls \ct. l()06 ( Iirr short 'FSS Act').

2. Tlie nature of' allegations in all these of fences re late to transpofiati()n. salc. posscssion, Inanufactufe, stomge. ctc. of bbacco products inclucling khaini, zarda, pan masala and other sLrch lrllcgctlll' harntlirl iru<l batrtred products

3. Hcard learncd counsel lbr the respective parties and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents - State, and pcrused tlre rccord.

4. I)erusal olthc record would reveal that the /rs involved in this batch ol crscs had alrcady dcalt with by this Coult extensively vide corrnron order datcd t)5.01 .2021 in Crt.P. No.l 52 of 2020 and batch rvhich u as rcl.rot'tccl as Nlohtl. Jarnecl Ahnrcd v. St:rtc of

Kt.../ (tl l' \r, <6lt) ol )t1)r <t lt,tt,ll -t 1'chnglnar. l'his ('ourt in thc said case b), rell,in-ri on \ ilri()Lrs decisions ol' tlrc Suprcnte CoLrrt cxplained and interyrcted the relc\ ilnl provisions rvith rvhich tlte Petitioners herein arc chargccl. -5. With regard to of-fenccs under Sections - 58 and 59 (i) ol thc liSS Act, 2006 it rvas held by this Court that policc cannot initiatc prosccution antl investigate thc oll'ences undcr tlte FSS Act, 200(r. Thc l:ro\,vcr to initiate prosecution is conferred only on the Food Satety Otllcers appointed under the IrSS Act, 2006. Further, this ('our-t hcld that 'tobacco' does r.rot tall within the clelinition o1' 'fbocl' undcr the I-'SS Act, 2006. Thcretbre, the Petitioncrs hercin cannot bc chargecl for ol-fences under Sections - 58 and 59 (i) of the FSS Act, 2006.

6. Furlher, in relation to the oll'ences under Sections - ltlS, 269,210,272,213,328,336 & 420 read with 34, 149, 5l I of the IPC, this Coufl gave detailed hndings as to how the said provisions do not attract merely because tobacco products were being sold, transportccl, posscssed. etc.'l'his Court rclying on the clecisions ol the Apex Court held that only the COTP Act, 2003 wilt apply in relation to ol'fenccs fclating to sale, rnarrultrcture and clistribution ol ' 2ol2 ( rit..r 642

I tobacco pro(lrrcts. [-herclirre. in light ol- this C]otrrt's clecisiorl in N'lohd. Janrecl r\hnrcd (Supra). the ollcnces allcgc:d ttnder the [['C :rre not nratle orrt auainst thc Pctitiottcrs hereirt. '. ln rclltiort to ol'ferrccs unlcr Scctiotts - 20 \2),7 (l) ancl 7

(5) this couft in l\'lohd. .Iamecl Ahmed (Supra) had held as lbllorvs:

29. With rcgard to thc ol'l'ences under COI-P Act, it is relevant to rneutiou thc objects and the reasons of ttrc said Act itsell- clearly state that the act is tneanl til prohibit thc adverlisenrent ol, and to provide lbr the regulation of traclc and cotntnerce in, and production, supply and distribution o1-. cigarettes and other tobacco products and lirr mattcrs connectcd thercwith or incidental therrto. A reading of the said objects of the said Act rvould rcveal that a total ban of tobacco products \\ as not envisaged by the said Act. -l'he Parliamcnt n-rerely lclt it cxpedient to control the advertiscurent ancl sale of tobacco products. As noted earlier in the ordcr, Scction-3 (p) otthe COTP Act and the schcdule thetein deline tobacco products. Pan masala, gutkha and chewing tobacco are included in the definition ol tobacco products.

Section-S of ttre COTP Act deals s,ith prohibition ol advertisement of cigarette and other tobacco products only. No persotl, who is engaged in thc production, supply or distribution of cigarettes or othcr products shall advertise the same. Similarly, no pefson having the control over a mediutn can advcrtise cigarcttes or tollacco products, and no pclson shall bc a parl ol'any adveflisetrreut.

Kt .t ( t I l, \| )i,lt) rt .'|:t) t) l\t\ lt

30. Scction-7 ot' the CO-l'l' Act dcals \\'ith thc inrl;osition ol'rcstriction ott tltc sale, traclc, cortturcrce ol totracco products unless cvcry package of cigarette or tobacco product contains a specilted warning (pictorial or otherwise). Scction-4 o1' the CO'|P Act, bans srnoking in pt,blic places. [n addition, Scction-6 of the COTP Act, plohibits thc sale of cigatettes or other tobacco products to a person who is under the age of 18 years are in an area within 100 yards of any educational institution.

31. A readin of this Act. oarticularlv Sections-4 { 6l nd 7 clcnrlv shou s that tltcre is tro gcncral b:rn or scneral prohibition on thc rnanufactu re/sale of tobacco rrroducts. 22 What is barrcd is merelv the salc ol thcsc trro<lrrc(s to a Derson. uho is belo*' the agc ol lll vcars and in an itrca u ithin I00 vards of an etlucationnl institution.'l'he othcr asl)ects covercd bt, Sections-S a nd 7 ol' the CO'IP Act deal rvith the advcrtisentcnt and thc rvarning. l'hich is to be containcd on :t rrlckage. in rvhich thc tobacco product is plcketl. 'l'his is a rcsulatorv ntechanism onlv. 'I'hcrefore. according to this Cou rt. the above sa id allcrrations of transnortation. Dossessl0n.

storagc. salc and lrurchase of banned tobacco products rvill not attract thc oflcncc u ntler Scction-7 of the cc)'IP Acr.

32. As tbr as Section-20 of the COTP Act is concerned, as stated above, the allegations against the petitioner in respective con-rplaints/charge sheets are that they were transporting, possessing, storing, selling and purchasing the banned tobacco products to the customers illegally in order to gain wrongful profits. In view ol the said allcgation, it is apt to refer to Section-20 (2) of the

|l .l t i i' \t' .Li') tt/ :tt:t) \\ itut(it ('O-l P Act lirr bcttc.r apprcciatiorr ol thc case and to dccicle the issLrc in (luestion, and thc samc is as untler: "20. Punislrrncnt lirr failure to give speci[ierl rvarnirrg ancl nicotinc and tar cotrlcnts.- (l)

(2) Any person rvho sells or distributes cigarettes or tobacco products which do not contain either on the packagc or on tlreil label, the specified warning and the r-ricotinc and tar contents shall in the casc ol' first conviction be punishablc with irnprisonrncnt firr a term, which may extend to one year. or with finc rvhich rnay extend to one thousand rupees, or with both, and, fbr the seconrl or subsequent conviction, with imprisonrnenl fbr a terrn which rnay extend to two years and with llne rupees."

which may cxtcnd to three thousand

33. 'l-hus Section-20 of CO'tP Act de:rls rvith punishnrent for thilu re to give specificd rvarnins antl nicotine and tar contcnts. Ilut in thc com rrl ain ts/charsc shcets. there is no allegation against the petitioners that they u,ere carrvrng on tradc or commerce in contraband or ant, other tobacco products w'ithout label and specified rvarning on thc said Jrroducts. In vicw of the samc. the contcnls of the conr DIaints/chargc shcets lack tlr c ingrcdien ts of Scction-20 (2) of thc COTI' r\ct. I,.vcn. thcrc is no allcsation th:rt thc seized rrroducl s r.lo nof contain la bcls nith stir tu tor l\'11rn Ing.

'l h us.

rcgisl erirrg the o:inrcs lb r the said offcnce lg:rinst tlre pctitioncrs lsn ot onlv contrar\, to Scction-20 (2)

Kl t Itll'\ithl'/t)l :tj_'// (! lr((( lr of(OIl).\ctbul also conlr2lrv to tlrc princitrlc laitl tlox n in (lhidurala Shr irnrsubrlcrl. In vierr ol'the sitnrc. lhc ol'lcrrcc urrder Scctiorr-20 (2) ol'CO' 'Act is also liablc to l)c (lruashe<l rgainst the pctitioncrs. I ()ncc llgitin reitcrltc that I irgrce \fith the principlc laitl dou'n bv the le:rrncd Single Judges oI' the I Iiqh Court nl' Andhra Pradesh in Chitlrrrala Shvamsubtler l. Sri. ,Iasanlth Flntcrt)riscs 2020 ( I ) AL't (('rl.) 215 (APllC) antl \/. Nagesrvara Rao 2020 Supreme (AP) 34[i.

J'heretble, in thc prcsent batch o1'thc Pctitions, tlrere are no allegations rvhich support thc ingredicnts ofSection 7 and 20 olthe COI P Act. 200i.

8. It is relevant to note that in sorne ol the cases, the Petitioners rvcre chargcd undcr Sections 21 antl 22 of the COTP Act, 2003, and the saicl provisions arc extracted belorv. "2[. Punishrnent for srnoking in certain places. -(I) Whocver contravenes the provisions of section 4 shall bc punishable with finc which may extcnd to trvo hundred rupees. (2) An offcnce under this scction shall bc compoundable and slull be tricd surnrnarily in accortlance rvith the procedure provided for summary trials in thc Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)."

Lt..J I t' l' \,' ;6i ),,t t1:tt <l h lt.h s "f2. Punislrrtrcnl lirl advcrtiscmont of ci!:arcttcs arrtl tobacco pro(lucts. Whoevcr contravctrcs the pnrvision ol scctirrn -.r shall. on conviction, lrc ltunishable (a) in the casc ol'first conviction, with irlprisorrmcnt fbr a tcr:rn rvhiclr rlav cxtcnd to two years or rvith fine r.l,hich tnay extend to onc lhousard rupces or with both, and (b) iri thc case ofsecond or subsequont conviction with irnprisonrnent fbr a tenn which may extend k) five years and with fine which rnay cxtcnd to five thousand rupccs."

9. According to this Court. the ingredients ot- Secrion 2l of CO fl' Act, 2003 are not satisfied. 'l'here is no allecatiorl aqainst the Petitioners hcrein that they rverc smoking publi0 placc.

ta Thercfbre . the Petitioners cannot be chargcd with Scction 21 ol CO'IP Act. 2003.

10. Further, tlre ingledicnts of Section 22 olthe CO'I'p Act, 2003 are also not attracted. There is nothing to suggest thal the Pctitioners in anyrvay adverlised cigarettcs and otltcr tobacco products ufiich is prohibited undcr Section 5 ol. the CO I'p Act, 2003. 'f he allcgations only peftain to transpoftation, sale, posscssion. uranuf-itcturc, stol'age alld do ltot incluclc adver.tiscment

tit I I t'l l) .\1) tltlt) t'l ll):tt t\ luttlt ol such products. f herclbrc, the l)ctitioners catrnot be chlrrgecl u'ith Section 22 ol'COTI'Act" 2001, I l. In vior, o{'the abovcsaicl discussiott, all thesc Criminal Petitions except Crl.P.. No.7455 of 202 I are allowed quashing the proceedings in the rcspectivc Crimes./Calcndar Cases/Sessions Cases in terrns of tlre comnron order, dated 05.0'l .2021 passed by this Court in Mohtl..Iamcel Ahnred (Supr:t).

12. Hou,ever, it is r.elcvant to rlote that in Crl. P. No.7455 of 2021, thc petitioner - accused was charged with Sections - 270 and 27i olthc IPC and Section - l{ (c) read rvith Scction - 20 (b) ofthe NDPS Ar:t. -fhe allegation aeainst thc pctitioner in the said casc is that he was lound in possession ol'tobacco products and ganja. Therefore, the said Crl.P. No.7455 ol 202 I is partly allowed and Crime No. 148 oI 2021 is quashed as far as the ollences under Sections -270 and 273 of tlrc IPC are concerned. The Investigating Officer shall proceed with the investigation in relation to tl.re allegations and olfence under Section - 8 (c) rcad with Sectior.r - 20 (b) of the NDPS Act.

\t ../ ( // /' \,, i' i't ,'t 'tt't' ,\ i'dt' lt llr ll. As thc procccdings in thc aloresaicl Cltirlinal l)etitions are tluasltcd against the respective pctitionels, the rcspectivc Station Housc ()ffrccls/lnvestigating Officers ar-c hereby directcd to rcturtl thc seized propcrty'/vehicles on proper idcntitication arld vcritlcation ol' ownership under due acknowledgrnellt. lll cases where charge sheets are already filed the respectivc petitioncls are at liberty to tile appropriate applications belbre the concerncd Magistlate tbr retum of the seized property/vchic [e and the Magistratc shall consider the satnc in accordancc with law. 1.1. I lou,cver, it is made clear that il tl-rc seized stock of tobacco produots or other products are expired, thc saurc shall bc cicstroycd by taking pcrmission lrorn the concerncd Magistrate.

15. During the course ol hearing, it was brought to the noticc of this Courl that the learned Magistrates are reccrvltlg rcrnantl ol' accuscd and sending them to j udicial remand ltrr the afbresrrid o l'l'onccs without going through thc orde r dated 05.07.1021 passed by this Coutl in Mohd. Jamccl Ahmctl. ln viet' ol'thc sattrc, thc l(egistrar (Judiciat) is directcd to circtrlatc a copy ot'this ordcr and a copy ofthe said ordcr datcd 05-07.202 I to

KI .J i ) i t' \t) ;/tlt) t,l :11.:0 <\ irdltlt ll all the Magistrates in the Statc ol' fcl a ll qlt rl il for pcrusal ancl taking necessary action in thc cases relating to the atbresaitl of'fellces. As a scqLrel, misccllancor-rs pctitions, il'arry, pcntling in the crirninal petitions shall stancl closccl.

l0'l'June,2022 K. I,AKSIIMAN. J Note:

Annex a copy of the order datecl 05.07.202 I in Ccccccccccc rl.P. No.l52 of 2020 andbatch. (B/O.) MSr