In CRM-M-50184-2022-PUNJ HC- P&H HC denies anticipatory bail to accused in case of illegal manufacturing of insecticides & pesticides, says such ingenuine products developed by-passing regulations, create menace by harming soil fertility, human & cattle health as well as revenue loss to gullible farmers  
Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill [31-10-2022]

Read Order: Sandeep Kumar and another v. State of Haryana

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, November 11, 2022: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has denied the grant of anticipatory bail to persons against whom serious allegations regarding their indulgence in the process of manufacturing the insecticides and pesticides illegally, which were ultimately to be sold to the farmers, were levelled.

"The ingenuine insecticides and pesticides, developed by-passing the regulations and field trials with inferior formulations, create menace by harming soil fertility, human and cattle health and revenue loss to the gullible farmers", the Bench of Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill asserted with concern. 

Through this petition, the petitioners sought the grant of anticipatory bail in an FIR registered Section 420 IPC read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Clauses 4, 5, 7 and 8(1) (2) of the Fertilizers Control Order, 1985, and 19 of the Terms and Conditions of Licence sub-clause (3) of Rule 09 of Insecticides Act, 1968, and sub-Rule (1) (2) and 10(4) III of Insecticide Rules, 1971, and Terms and Conditions of Licence of Clause 15 and Clause 16, 17 and 17(2) of

Insecticide Rules, 1971.

Upon a raid conducted by the appropriate body/ authorities, a heavy quantity of fertilizers/pesticides and material relating to manufacturing of insecticides was found at the factory of the petitioners. 

As a result, the petitioners were booked under the above-stated laws. 

It was the case of the Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners had a licence to sell and stock the insecticides and exhibite the same for its sale and distribution and that the requisite licence was also produced before the raiding party. It was further submitted that no FIR under the Insecticides Act, could be registered as only the process of filing a complaint was stipulated in the Act.

The counsel further contended that no offence under Section 420 IPC was made out against the petitioner and so far as recovery of bags of fertilizer was concerned, the petitioners being agriculturalists, the same were kept for using it for the land owned by the father of the second petitioner. 

On the other hand, while reaffirming the factum of above-stated raid, the State Counsel submitted that recovery of two chemical mixing machines and am empty bottles to be filled with pesticides and insecticides, showed that the petitioners were in the illegal process of manufacturing the insecticides and pesticides, which were to be supplied to the distributors and further sold to the farmers in the State.

After hearing the parties, the Court observed at the very outset that there were serious allegations against the petitioners regaridng their indulgence in the process of manufacturing the insecticides and pesticides illegally, which were ultimately to be sold to the farmers. 

The ingenuine insecticides and pesticides, developed by-passing the regulations and field trials with inferior formulations, created menace by harming soil fertility, human and cattle health and revenue loss to the gullible farmers, the Court categorically asserted. 

Thus, keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence, the Court found that the petitioners were required for custodial interrogation to ascertain the source of recovered large number of raw material (wrapper etc.).

Thus, the present petition was dismissed.