SATISH CHANDRA M AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims to be the third accused in a prosecution under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Accused 1 and 2 have already been found not guilty and acquitted by the learned Magistrate as per judgment dt.29.3.2005, a copy of which is produced as Annex.B. Their plea of warranty was accepted and they were found not guilty and acquitted. The petitioner, who claims to be the third accused, is the alleged warrantor. The alleged warranter has been impleaded as per a communication received from the Municipal Corporation office, Khandwa, which is produced as Ext.P27 in the trial before the learned Magistrate. Based on the warrantee and the letter of the Municipal Corporation, the third accused was arrayed as the accused in the prosecution.

(2.) The petitioner has now come to this Court in 2007 with the prayer that the proceedings against him may be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(3.) What is the reason? The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Annex.E i.e., Ext.P27 does not convey the correct information. According to him, the information furnished in Annex.E is incorrect. He wants to rely on Annex.C document, copy of a certificate issued by the Health Officer of Municipal Corporation, which contains information contrary to Ext.P27.