STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION Vs. JOGINDER NATH KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the impugned order the Additional Sessions Judge quashed the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate dated 9th February 1978 framing charge against the accused-petitioner under section 7 read With section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and discharged the accused. Dissatisfied with the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, the State has come in revision.

(2.) The relevant facts for the decision of the 'petition are that on 29th March 1977 Food Inspector Balwant Singh took a sample of cow's boiled milk from the petitioner. The Food Inspector divided the sample in three equal parts and poured them into three clean and dry bottles and sealed the bottles in accordance with the rules. The Food Inspector sent one part of the sample to the Public Analyst and the remaining two parts to the Local Health Authority as required by sub-section (C) to section 11 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The Public Analyst found the sample to be adulterated due to O.5 per cent deficiency in milk fat and 3.11 per cent deficiency in milk solids not fat. On the receipt of the report of the Pubilc Analyst, the Municipal Prosecutor filed a complaint under section 7 read with section 16 of the Act against the accused on 11th July 1977. Within the statutory period of 10 days the accused filed an application under section 13(2) of the Act for sending one of the counter-parts of the sample kept by the Local Health Authority for analysis to the Central Food Laboratory. On the application, the Magistrate gave a: direction for the production of the remaining two parts of the sample. In compliance of the order of the Magistrate, the sample were produced before him and the Magistrate after satisfying himself that the mark and the seal and fastening are intact passed an order for sending one out of the two bottles of the sample to the Director of the Central Food Laboratory for examination and report ; the other part was returned to the Local Health Authority.

(3.) The Director vide report dated 2nd November 1977 informed the Magistrate that the sample is decomposed and, therefore, is unfit for analysis. The Director appended a note to the above mentioned report and the said note reads as under :