FOOD INSPECTOR Vs. SREENIVASA SHENOY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Delay condoned. Leave granted.

(2.) When Report of a Public Analyst was superseded by a certificate of Director of Central Food Laboratory, is it necessary to obtain a fresh consent to institute prosecution and recommence the proceedings under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') . A Single Judge of the High Court of Kerala held that it is necessary, and directed the trial Magistrate to wait for some more time and "in the event of no such consent of the appropriate authority is obtained and produced before the Magistrate within a reasonable time not exceeding one month - for the purpose", discharge the accused. The Food Inspector who instituted the prosecution as well as the State have filed this appeal by Special Leave against the said order of the High Court.

(3.) The facts out of which the said order happened to be passed, are the following: