KINGSUK NAG Vs. R P CHRISTIAN FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by one of the original accused of Criminal Case No. 613 of 2000 pending on the file of learned Chief Judicial Magistrater Amreli, wherein, he and other accused have been tried for the offences made punishable under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act,.

(2.) The applicant submitted an application seeking discharge before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli, on the ground that considering the provisions of the Act, and in particular, Section 7 read with Rule 37-D, no offence had been committed by the applicant. This application came to be allowed by the learned Magistrate by Judgment and order dated 27th March, 2001 and prayer for discharge from the proceedings was granted in favour of the applicant.

(3.) I have gone through the record of this application and the submission of the learned advocate of rival parties. The allegation against the applicant is that by publishing aforesaid advertisement in the "The Times of India" he had contravened the provisions of Rule 37-D of the Rules and consequently he has committed offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Act. It is. therefore, necessary to refer to the said Rule. Rule 37-D reads as under ; 37-D1 LABELLING OF EDIBLE OILS AND FATS The package, label or the advertisement of edible oils and fats shall not use the expressions "Super - Refined". "Extra Refined". "MicroRefined". "Double Refined". "Ultra - Refined". 'Anti-Cholesterol". "Cholesterol Fighter". "Soothing to Heart". "Cholesterol Friendly". "Saturated Fat Free", or such other expressions which are an exaggeration of the quality of the Product."