1957 (9) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ions Judge of West Tanjore in C. A. No. 290 of 1956 on his file. 2. The Co-operative Milk Supply Society at Papanasam was prosecuted along with two other accused for adulteration of milk an offence punishable under Section 16 (1) of the Central Act 37 of 1954. There is no doubt about the fact that the milk sold was adulterated. This fact is not disputed even by the learned Counsel for the respo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wer court is not correct. 3. Section 17 (1) of the Act clearly says that where an offence under the Act has been committed by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dent that it is not quite clear under what part of Section 17 the prosecution was launched against accused 3. If it is under Clause (1), then the prosecution must have distinctly let in evidence as to who was responsible to the Society for the conduct of the business of the Society. Only if it is under Clause (2), the prosecution will have to let in evidence about the consent or connivance or of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the milk was done by the clerk, because on his own showing the secretary who was only a honorary secretary was not going to the society daily and the business was left in the hands of the clerk with a check over him by the secretary. This would not make him a person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge and was responsible to the Society for the conduct of the business of the ....