Judgment Viney Mittal, J. 1. Petitioner S.K. Sood who is an Ex-Managing Director of M/s Shivalik Fertilizer Limited has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the complaint dated 20.11.1995 pending in the Court of Special Judge, Hoshiarpur under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act read with Clause 19(1)(a) of the Fertilizer Control Order and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. A copy of the aforesaid complaint has been appended as Annexure P-1 with the petition. 2. As per the averments made in the complaint, on 6.6.1995, a sample of fertilizer was drawn by a Fertilizer Inspector from the premises of M/s Amar Nath Munshi Ram, Commission Agent, Bhangala. The aforesaid firm was a dealer of the fertilizer manufactured by the manufacturer M/s Shivalik Fertilizer Limited. Upon analysis of the same by the Quality Control Laboratory, Ludhiana, the fertilizer was found to be sub-standard. A show cause notice was issued to the company about the failure of the sample and reply was sent by the company. Ultimately, the complaint was filed on 20.11.1995 in the Court of learned Special Judge, Hoshiarpur against the dealers, Production Manager of the Company, namely Rajinder Singh as well as the petitioner S.K. Sood, the Managing Director of the Company. 3. The main ground upon which the complaint and subsequent proceedings have been challenged by the petitioner and are sought to be quashed is that while filing the complaint, the manufacturing Company namely M/s. Shivalik Fertilizer Limited was not arrayed as a co-accused. On that basis it is submitted that the complaint under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act read with the Fertilizer Control Order itself was not maintainable. 4. Sh. Dinesh Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the absence of the company as a co-accused, the complaint against the present petitioner S.K. Sood who was the Managing Director of the Company was not maintainable and to support the aforesaid submission he has relied upon S.H. Chisty v. State of Haryana, 1997(2) Recent C.R. 565, Suresh Chand Sharma v. State of Haryana, 1997(2) Recent Criminal Cases 696 and a judgment of this Court in N.K. Kakkar and others v. State of Punjab, Criminal Misc. No. 10011-M of 1997 decided on 1.8.2002. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the submissions made by Sh. No. 10011-M of 1997 decided on 1.8.2002. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the submissions made by Sh. Dinesh Goyal have merit and deserve to succeed. 6. I have perused the complaint and find that the company - M/s Shivalik Fertilizer Limited was not arrayed as a co-accused and, therefore, in the absence of the aforesaid company, the complaint could not be filed against S.K. Sood who was merely a Managing Director of the company. My view finds full support by the judgments in the case of S.H. Chisty v. State of Haryana (supra), N.K. Kakkars case (supra) and Suresh Chand Sharmas case (supra). 7. In the result, the present petition is allowed and the complaint Annexure P-1 and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioner are hereby quashed. 8. It is made clear quashing of the complaint against the present petitioner S.K. Sood would have absolutely no bearing or effect upon the continuation thereof, against the remaining accused. 9. Since the matter has remained pending in this Court for sufficiently long time, therefore, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as possible and in any case not later than 31.12.2003.Petition allowed.