M C BHATT FOOD INSPECTOR Vs. HOTEL ASHIRWAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the Surat Municipal Corporation, under Section 378 (4) of Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 17.5.2002, rendered in P.F.A.Case No.23 of 1997 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Municipal), Surat. THE said case was registered against the present respondents for the offence under Sections 7 & 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'PFA Act') in the Court of learned JMFC (Muni), Surat. THE said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the Surat Municipal Corporation on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by learned Magistrate is against the law and evidence on record.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case on 26.3.1996, the complainant along with his peon visited the premises of the respondents and took the sample of curd 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 curd does not conform to the standards and 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 (Municipal), Surat, being PFA Case No.23 of 1997. 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. Hence, this Appeal requires to be dismissed.