Delhi High Court: A petition was filed by Hennes and Mauritz Retail Private Limited (H&M) seeking to quash the criminal complaint and the proceedings emanating therefrom and to set aside the summoning order dated 02-05-2016. Amit Bansal, J., held that no ingredients of the offence under Section 13(3)(b) of the 2011 Rules are made out in the present case.
An inspection was carried out at the retail store of the petitioner situated at Select Citywalk, District Centre, Saket by an Inspector of the Legal Metrology Department. As per the inspection report, the size of a cardigan was not converted into meters and therefore, it is alleged that the petitioner company committed an offence under Rule 13(3)(b) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 (hereinafter 2011 Rules).
A notice was sent to the petitioner alleging a violation of Rule 13(3)(b) of the 2011 Rules and the petitioner was directed to pay a penalty as well as fees of Rs.2000/- in terms of Section 32 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. The petitioner then made a representation to the Secretary, Consumer Affairs, seeking clarification on the 2011 Rules. A complaint was thereby filed by the respondent pursuant to which summons were issued that stands assailed in the present petition.
The petitioner relied on an advisory dated 31-03-2017, issued by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Legal Metrology Division, wherein it has been stated that loose garments which are sold would not constitute a ‘pre-packaged commodity’ in terms of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. In a reply submitted by the respondent, it has been admitted that the mandatory labeling requirement for ‘prepackaged commodities’ is not applicable to garments sold in loose form.
Thus, the Court held that the impugned summoning order has been issued in a mechanical manner without examining the relevant provisions of law in relation to the complaint. The impugned summoning order fails to appreciate that the goods of the petitioner company are sold as loose articles and the customers are free to try or inspect the same. Thus, they would not fall within the ambit of the 2011 Rules and no proceedings can be initiated thereunder.
[H&M Hennes & Mauritz Retail Pvt. Ltd. v. Legal Metrology Department, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4380, decided on 24-07-2023]
Advocates before Court:
Mr. N. Hariharan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Seema Salwan and Mr. Rahul Sharma with Ms. Punya Rekha Angara, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Ms. Sharian Mukherji, Mr. Varun Deswal, Mr. Siddharth S. Yadav, Mr. Muneed and Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, Advocates for petitioner;
Mr. Pradeep Gahalot, APP for State.
