Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday acquitted Prithvi Raj, a production supervisor at M/s Jai Chemicals in Haryana’s Faridabad, of charges related to the supply of misbranded insecticides.
Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi overturned Raj’s 2009 conviction, holding that he could not be held responsible since the pesticide batch in question had been manufactured before his appointment to the role of quality control.
The case dates back to January 2, 2003, when an insecticide inspector in Faridkot conducted a surprise check at M/s S.K. Pesticides on Ferozepur Road in Sadiq town. Among the samples drawn was a one-litre pack of Monocrotophos 36% SL, manufactured by M/s Jai Chemicals. Testing at the Amritsar laboratory revealed the active ingredient content to be only 27.70 per cent instead of the required 36 per cent, marking it as “misbranded”.
As per procedure, show-cause notices were issued to the dealer as well as the manufacturer and its responsible personnel, including Raj, who was named as the company’s production supervisor. A second test at the Central Insecticides Laboratory confirmed the misbranding, showing the ingredient content at 32.72 per cent.
The chief judicial magistrate’s court in Faridkot convicted Raj and the company’s proprietor on October 15, 2009, sentencing Raj to two years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10,000. The dealer and his staff, however, were acquitted under provisions protecting sellers who source goods in good faith from licensed manufacturers. Raj’s appeal before the additional sessions judge in Faridkot was dismissed in 2011, pushing him to move the high court.
Before Justice Bedi, Raj’s counsel Sanjeev Sharma and Vikram Vir Sharda argued that he could not be held liable because he joined the company months after the batch was manufactured. The court record showed that the batch in question was produced on August 17, 2002, while Raj was formally appointed production supervisor in charge of quality control only on December 23, 2002.
Accepting this timeline, Justice Bedi observed: “Quite apparently, when the batch from which the sample was taken and sent for analysis was manufactured, the petitioner was not the person in charge of quality control. Therefore, no liability can be affixed upon him.”
With this finding, the high court set aside the judgments of the lower courts and acquitted Raj.
The ruling underscored how a simple mismatch of dates, overlooked in two earlier rounds of trial and appeal, had wrongfully prolonged his conviction and punishment.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram