DELHI ADMINISTRATION Vs. SANJAY JAIN & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present is a petition for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned order dated 17.11.2009 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-II, New Delhi, in CC No.162/1999 whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charges levelled against him.

(2.) The facts herein briefly are, the Food Inspector S.P.Singh purchased a sample of Mustard Oil from the respondents on 29.01.1999 at about 1:30 p.m. Thereafter, the Food Inspector divided the sample into three equal parts, each bottle containing the sample was separately packed, fastened and sealed according to the PFA Act and Rules. The respondent's signatures were also obtained on the LHA slip and the wrapper of the sample bottles. One counterpart of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst in intact condition and two counter parts were deposited with the LHA. Upon analysis it was found by the PA that the sample did not conform to standard because iodine value is more than the maximum prescribed limit of 112 and saponification value is also more than the maximum prescribed limit of 117. The BTT is also less than the minimum prescribed limit of 23 degree C. The respondents were charged under Section 2(ia)(a)(b)(d)(m) of PFA Act punishable under Section 16(1)(a) read with Section 7 of the PFA Act and Rules to which he pleaded not guilty.

(3.) The sole contention that was raised before the Trial Court was whether the sample taken was representative or not. It was pointed out on behalf of the respondents that there was vast variation between the report of PA and the Director, CFL which establishes that the sample was not representative.