SALIM A.M. Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dated this the 21st day of May, 2020. The revision petitioner is aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed on him by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kochi for the offence under Section 16 (1)(a)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 50 (1) of the PFA Rules, as affirmed in appeal by the Additional Sessions Court, (Ad hoc-I), Ernakulam.

(2.) The revision petitioner was conducting an ice cream parlour in Chellanam Grama Panchayat. On 7.12.1998, the Food Inspector, Kochi Circle conducted an inspection during the course of which, 1 litre of cow milk was purchased from the parlour, which, on analysis, was found to be adulterated. The Food Inspector found that as on the date of inspection, the icecream parlour was being conducted without valid licence as mandated under the PFA Act and Rules. Thereupon, a complaint was filed by the Food Inspector, arraying the petitioner as the first accused, the nominee of the milk manufacturing company as the second accused and the company as the third accused. The offences alleged were under sections 2(ia) (a) (m), 7(iii), 17 r/w 16 (1)(a)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 50 (1) of the PFA Rules.

(3.) The trial court acquitted accused 2 and 3, finding them not guilty of the offences, while at the same time, finding the revision petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 16 (1) (a) (ii) of the PFA Act and Rule 50(1) of the PFA Rules. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the conviction and sentence having been dismissed, this revision petition is filed challenging the judgments of the trial and appellate courts.