STATE Vs. DINESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is againit the acquittal recorded by Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, on 8-5-85 in favour of the respondent under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short PFA Act). Earlier, learned Metropolitan Magistrate by his order dated 12-6-84 had found the respondent guilty and had sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 5000.00 In default of payment of the fine, the respondent had to undergo simple imprisonment for five months.

(2.) The field staff Delhi Administration on 14-10-82 at 2.30 p.m. had lifted a sample of 'Suji' from the premises of M/s. Aggarwal Provisions Store, B-69/1, Main Market, Bhajan Pura, Delhi. The sample was sold by Dinesh Kumar respondent to Public Witness 3 Gian Chand, Food Inspector. After sampling the Suji according to the rules, the sample thereof was sent to the Public Analyst who on analysis found the sample containing 26 living and dead insects.

(3.) The acquittal was mainly recorded on three grounds. The first ground is that the report of the Public Analyst has not been proved. The second ground is that the Public Analyst's report was not formally put to the respondent while recording his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found justification in the assertion of the respondent that he has been prejudiced due to the failure of the court below to put the circumstances to him for explanation. The third ground on which acquittal was recorded was that the Public Analyst has not specifically mentioned that the sample was adulterated on account of living and dead insects found in the Suji or that the same was otherwise unfit for human consumption or was insect infested.