MOHANLAL THAKERSINHBHAI AMETHIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Application has been filed by the original accused of Criminal Case No. 488/86 of the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Kalavad, District Jamnagar, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, dated 27th September, 1994, in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1988, by which conviction awarded by the learned J.M.F.C., Kalavad to the present petitioners in Criminal Case No. 488 of 1986 for the charges under Section 7(1) read with Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 was confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar.

(2.) Brief facts of the case and very material data for deciding this Revision is as under : The then Food Inspector Mr.J.M.Soni, predecessor of respondent herein Mr. S.B. Bhatt obtained a sample of "Tikha Ganthiya" (farsan) from Chetna Hotel, Ranuja. At that time, present petitioner No.1 was present while present petitioner No.2 was the owner of the said Chetana Hotel. Material dates are; the sample was purchased by the Food Inspector on 15.5.1985; the sample was sent to the Public Analyst at Bhuj by the Food Inspector on 16.5.1985; on 21st May, 1985 the sample was received by the Public Analyst; on 24th May, 1985 the sample was analysed and examined by the Public Analyst; on 12th June, 1985 a certificate i.e. report of Analysis was signed by the Public Analyst but sent the same on 13.6.1985 to Local Health Authority. Thereafter, the complaint against the present petitioners came to be filed on 25.7.1986 about after 15 months after obtaining the sample of farsan. The present petitioners were served with the copy of analyst report on 4th August 1986. Charge under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for the offences punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16 was framed against the present petitioners. The Public Analyst report which is on record at Exh. 32 declared following result in respect to the analysis of the sample taken from the petitioners:

(3.) Therefore, in the opinion of Public Analyst, Public Health Laboratory, Bhuj - Kutch, the sample "farsan" did not conform to the standards laid down under Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 because analysis revealed Metanil Yellow Coal-tar Colour in sample, which was prohibited colour, under the Rules of Prevention of Food Adulterations Rules, 1955. After completing the trial, the accused were found guilty for the aforesaid offences and were sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00, in default simple imprisonment of 9 months.