KANTIBHAI M LIMBACHIA Vs. RAKESH TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant, under Section 378 (4) Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 1.6.1989, rendered in Criminal Case No.2479 of 1984 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navsari. THE said case was registered against the present respondents for the offence under Section 7(1) read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'PFA Act') in the Court of learned JMFC, Navsari. THE said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the appellant ' original complainant on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by learned Magistrate is against the law and evidence on record.

(2.) ACCORDING to the case of the appellant, on 4.10.1983, the complainant ' Food Inspector along with Panch witnesses visited the premises of the respondents ' accused and took the sample of vegetable Ghee Rasda Brand for the purpose of analysis. Thereafter, after completing the necessary procedure, the complainant sent the said samples to the Public Analyst for analysis. The Public Analyst submitted the report in which it has been found that 'the sample of Vegetable Ghee Rasda Brand was found adulterated and not as per provisions laid down under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.' Upon receipt of the report the complainant, after obtaining sanction, filed complaint against the respondent ' accused in the Court of learned JMFC, Navsari being Criminal Case No.2479 of 1984. At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Magistrate vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondents ' accused.

(3.) IT is settled legal position that in acquittal Appeal, the Appellate Court is not required to re-write the Judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the Appellate Court is in agreement with the reasons assigned by the trial Court acquitting the accused. In the instant case, this Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and findings recorded by the trial Court while acquitting the respondents ' accused and adopting the said reasons and for the reasons aforesaid, in my view, the impugned Judgment is just, legal and proper and requires no interference by this Court at this stage. Hence, this Appeal requires to be dismissed.