SHEORATAN AGARWAL & ANOTHER versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

SHEORATAN AGARWAL & ANOTHER versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

There is no statutory compulsion under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act that prohibits prosecution of persons in-charge or officers of a company unless the company is prosecuted. Each or any of them may be prosecuted separately or along with the company if there is a contravention by the company.

Parties
Appellant: Sheoratan Agarwal; Appellant: Raghunandanlal Chaturvedi; Respondent: State of Madhya Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 September 1984
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Essential Commodities Act, Corporate Criminal Liability, Interpretation of Section 10
Criminal Law Essential Commodities Act Corporate Criminal Liability Interpretation of Section 10

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheoratan Agarwal

Appellant

Raghunandanlal Chaturvedi

Appellant

State of Madhya Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether persons in-charge or officers of a company can be prosecuted separately for violations of orders made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act without prosecuting the company itself

Ratio Decidendi

There is no statutory compulsion under Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act that prohibits prosecution of persons in-charge or officers of a company unless the company is prosecuted. Each or any of them may be prosecuted separately or along with the company if there is a contravention by the company.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals are rejected.