FOOD INSPECTOR Vs. SHAMSUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Food Inspector, Alwaye Municipality, is the appellant. The complaint was filed against respondents 1 and 2 (accused 1 and 2) under S.16(1)(a)(j) read with S.7(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. A-l is the proprietor and A-2 is the salesman. The complainant's case is that on 17-11-1979 at about 11.30 a. m he purchased from the second accused 375 grams of tea dust from about 4 1/2 kgs kept for sale in the shop of the 1st accused after giving him prescribed notice and price, that he prepared mahazar in the presence of independent witnesses, that he had complied with the legal formalities under the Act and that the sample analysed by the Public Analyst was found to be adulterated. On the basis of the report of the analyst the complaint was filed against accused 1 and 2.

(2.) On the application preferred by the accused one part of the sample was forwarded to the Central Food Laboratory, Mysore for analysis. Central Food Laboratory, Mysore reported that the sample does not conform to the standards laid down for tea under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules and is therefore adulterated.

(3.) The Trial Court held that the Food Inspector had complied with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules. Complainant's contention that the tea dust was adulterated was also accepted by the Trial Court in view of Exts. P12 and P16 reports. But the court acquitted the accused holding that tea is a primary food and that the accuseds' plea that the proviso to S.2(ia)(m) of the Act would apply to the case is tenable.