BABUBHAI JINABHAI GUJJAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has challenged an order dated 31.1.2013 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una below application Ex.93 filed by the petitioner in Criminal Case No.603/94. The petitioner has also challenged the revisional order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Una in Criminal Revision Application No.6/13 confirming the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.

(2.) THE petitioner is the original accused in Criminal Case No.603/94 for offence punishable under section 16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 ("PFA" for short). Though the case was instituted in the year 1994, it appears that no meaningful progress was made till the year 2009. In the year 2010, the learned Magistrate framed charge against the petitioner and thereafter proceeded to try the case as warrant triable. Witnesses were examined and allowed to be crossexamined by the petitioner. At the end of the trial, when the case was fixed by the learned Magistrate for oral submissions, application Ex.93 came to be filed by the petitioner on or around 3.12.2012. In such application, it was contended that as per section 16 -A of the PFA, trial had to be conducted summarily. The action of the Magistrate to conduct the case as a warrant triable case was therefore not legal. It was, therefore, prayed that the trial be conducted de nova as summary trial as provided under section 16A of the PFA.

(3.) THE said application came to be dismissed by the learned Magistrate by impugned order dated 31.1.2013. The learned Magistrate observed that the trial has been conducted as a warrant triable case. The accused as well as his advocate participated during the entire trial. Witnesses were examined and cross -examined at length. He further noted that "thus I am of the humble opinion that when in the present case, at the relevant time order has been passed to conduct the case as a warrant triable case, the decision of the Supreme court would have no direct bearing on the case on hand".