FOOD INSPECTOR Vs. GOPINATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Food Inspector of the Punalur Municipality is the appellant. The appeal is filed against the acquittal of the accused in C. C. No. 117 of 1978 of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Punalur, for alleged offences punishable Under Section 16 (1) read with Section 2 (i) (e) (f) and Section 7 (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) P. W. 1. who is the complainant-Food Inspector, went to the provision store of the accused on 27-2-1978. After following the formalities prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, for short the Act, he purchased 750 grams of "vadaparippu" after paying the price thereof under Ext. P 1 (a) acknowledgement and Ext. P 2 bill. He divided the sample into three equal parts, filled them in three clean dry bottles, packed and sealed as provided under the rules. One of the sample bottles was sent to the public analyst with the specimen seal. The public analyst sent Ext. p 5 report, stating that the sample did not conform to the standard prescribed for foodgrains in the rules framed under the Act. In due course the accused was tried for the offences already mentioned.

(3.) THE Court held that there was no evidence to show that the "vadaparippu" purchased was injurious to health and therefore unfit for human consumption. It was held that the "vadaparippu" is a primary food in its natural form and that it was not made out that it became infested on account of any human agency and as such it could not be held to be adulterated within the meaning of that word as defined in the Act. The Court further held that there was noncompliance of Rule 22 of the rules framed under the Act inasmuch as there is no definite evidence to the effect that PW-1 sent 250 grams of the sample for analysis. It was also found bv the court that there was no proper mixing Up of the sample and as such the sampling was defective and no conviction can be entered on the result of the analysis that followed.