RAM SARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision Petition is directed against conviction of the accused for offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 2 (ia), (i), (f), (h), (j), (m) punishable under Section 16 (i), (ia) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the 'Act' for short) and for violation of Rule 5 (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (hereinafter called the 'Rules' for short). The accused has been ordered to undergo rigourous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default to pay the fine and further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. In appeal the conviction as well as the sentence has been confirmed.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the Petitioner has filed this revision Petition on three grounds: firstly, there was violation of Section 13 (2) of the Act for non-supply of the report of the Public Analyst in time; secondly, the defence led by the accused has not been properly appreciated; and thirdly, that some of the exhibited documents have not been signed by the presiding Officer.

(3.) 1. In so far as the first point is undisputedly concerned, sample of the adulterated article was lifted on 21st August, 1989. Report of the Public Analyst is dated 5th September, 1989. Complaint does not disclose anything about supply of the copy of the report and requisite intimation either by registered post or by hand. It is submitted that Ex. Public Witness 1/F is meaningless. Thus, the right of the accused has been violated under Section 13 (2). 3.2. For proper appreciation of the submission Section 13 (2) of the Act is reproduced as under; "13. Report of the public analyst. [(1).............. (2) on receipt of the report of the result of the analysis under sub-section (1) to the effect that the article of food is 'adulterated, the Local (Health) Authority shall, after institution of prosecution against the person from whom the sample of the article of food was taken and the person, if any, whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed under Section 14A, forward in such manner as may be prescribed, a copy of the report of the result of the analysis to such person or persons, a the case may be, informing such person or persons that if it is so desired, either or both of them may make an application to the court within a perio.d of ten days from the date of receipt of the copy of the report to get the sample of the article of food kept by the Local (Health) Authority analysed by the Central Food Laboratory. (Emphasis supplied) 3.3. In terms of Section 13 (2), the Local (Health) Authority is supposed (i) to send copy of report of the result of analysis after institution of prosecution to concerned persons (s) in prescribed manner; and (ii) to inform concerned person (s) that if it is so desired, either of them or both of them may make an application within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the copy of the report to get the sample kept by the Authority analysed by the Central Food Laboratory. Concerned persons are the vendor who gives the sample and the supplier/manufacturer whose particulars have been given under Section 14A. It may be mentioned that the exercise of the right under Section 13 (2) by the accused depends on the obligation or duties cast upon the Local (Health) Authority in supplying the copy of the report of the Public Analyst and informing the concerned person about his right to send the sample with Local (Health) Authority for analysis within ten days from the date of receipt of the report and such information. 3.4. Before proceeding further it is desirable to see the method prescribed for sending the report under the Rules. What was earlier Rule 9-A, now after subsequent amendment in 1995. In Rules has just been re-numbered 9-B without modifying its language. Erstwhile Rule 9-A and present Rule 9-B of the Rules read as under: "9-A (9-B) Local (Health) Authority to send report to person concerned. The Local (Health) Authority shall within a period of ten days after the institution of prosecution forward a copy of the report or the result of analysis in Form III delivered to him under sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 by registered post or by hand as may be appropriate, to the person from who the sample of the article was taken by the Food Inspector, and simultaneously also to the person if any, whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed under Section 14-A of the Act: Provided that where the sample conform to the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder, and no prosecution is intended under Sub-section (2) or no action is intended under sub-section (2-E) of Section 13 of the Act, the Local (Health) Authority shall intimate the result of the Vendor from whom the sample has been taken and also to the person, whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed under Section 14-A of the Act, within 10 days from the receipt of the report from the Public Analyst. 3.5. It is notable that in terms of Rule 9-A (now Rule 9-B) of the Rules made under the Act, the Local (Health) Authority is supposed to forwand a copy of the report of the result of the analysis in Form III within a period of ten days after the institution of prosecution, by registered post or by hand, as may be appropriate to the person from whom the sample was taken, and simultaneously also to the person, if any, whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed under Section 14-A of the Act. 3.6. Thus, a conjoint reading of Section 13 (2) and Rule 9-B makes it clear that copy of the report of the result of analysis is to be send within ten days after the institution of prosecution by registered post or by hand. 206 3.7..From the order sheet is appears that prosecution was instituted on 13th December, 1998. 3.8. Public Witness -1 Gopal Singh stated in this regard in examination-in- chief as under: "After institution of the complaint the intimation letter alongwith copy of the PA'S report was sent to the accused by registered post and the said documents were also sent to the accused through the concerned F.I. The copy of the intimation letter is Ex. Public Witness 1/E; as the F.I. could not find out the accused for the service of the intimation letter is and copy of the PA report, I intimated the fact before the Hon'ble Court vide my application Ex. PW1/E. He further stated;