Reliance Retail Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand
In the High Court of Jharkhand
WP(C) 4285/2014
Before Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Decided on August 29, 2018

Relevancy of the Case: Pari materia provisions to Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 85)
• The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (Section 3(zx), 26, 27, 51)
• The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Section 141)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• Petitioner number 2 is an employee of the Ranchi store of Reliance Retail Limited, petitioner number 1. Petitioner number 3 is the store manager.
• The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, initiated proceedings under Section 3(zx) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2005, read with Sections 26, 27, and 51. It was found that the collected sample is misbranded, and it does not comply with the packaging and labelling requirements.
• In the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner, petitioner number 1 was never a party. The Commissioner issued notices to petitioners number 2 and 3, but they did not appear.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel submitted that Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are pari materia with Section 66 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. He further submitted that in cases involving offences by companies, the proceedings must involve the company as a party. The proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner never considered petitioner number 1 as the party. Hence, the court must quash the proceedings.

Opinion of the Bench

• Nonetheless, the court disagreed with the pari materia relation suggested by the petitioner.
• Only Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are pari materia with each other.

Final Decision

• As a result, there is no merit in the petitioners’ arguments. Hence, the court dismissed the petition.