R GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who is the second accused in S.T. No. 347/1993 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Neyyattinkara, has unsuccessfully challenged his conviction and sentence before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, through Criminal Appeal No. 49/1995. The learned Additional Sessions Judge concurred with the findings entered by the trial court, confirmed the conviction and sentence, and dismissed the appeal. Samples of ice cream were drawn by PW1, Mobile Squad Food Inspector, Thiruvananthapuram, from the first accused. The present petitioner, being the owner of the shop, who is the licensee, was arraigned as A2. Al died during the pendency of the appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and thereby, the charge against him abated.

(2.) On going through the procedure adopted by PW1, it seems that he had complied with all the legal formalities. The sampling was proper, and the sample was forwarded to the Public Analyst, and he obtained Ext. P12 report. On getting Ext. P12 report, the complaint was preferred before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Neyyattinkara. Thereupon, the parties, on getting notice under S. 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, approached the court and applied for forwarding the sample to the Central Food Laboratory.

(3.) The learned Magistrate directed the Local Health Authority (LHA) to produce the second sample before Court for forwarding it to the Central Food Laboratory. Ultimately, the sample was forwarded to the Central Food Laboratory and on analysis, Ext. P16 certificate was received, which also revealed that the said food article does not conform to the standard prescribed for ice cream in Appendix BA. 11.02.07 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and thereby, the same is adulterated.