ASHWIN H ACHARYA Vs. TARABEN ARVINDBHAI SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.H.L.Jani, learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.2 ? State.

(2.) THE present Appeal for enhancement of sentence has been filed by the appellant - Food Inspector, Rajkot Municipal Corporation, under Section 377 Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 8.3.1996, rendered in Criminal Case No.577 of 1988 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, (Muni.), Rajkot. THE said case was registered against the present respondent Nos.1 and 2 ? original accused for the offence under section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short ?PFA Act?) in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajkot. THE said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the Food Inspector on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by learned Magistrate is against the law and evidence on record.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate Mr. M.J.Buddhbhatti, appearing on behalf of the appellant ? Food Inspector has contended that the Judgment and order of acquittal is contrary to law and evidence on record and is not proper. He has contended that pink oil soluble colta dye is not permitted as per the provisions of PFA Act. He has contended that the trial Court has failed to appreciate the report of Public Analyst and passed less than minimum sentence. He has also contended that the offences punishable under the Act are directly connected with the health of public at large.