THAKORBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the contents of report of public analyst given under Section 13 of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954, which is admissible in evidence by virtue of sub-section (5) of section 13 automatically acquires for it a probative value is the focal question posed for consideration. Whether the public analyst's report not superseded by certificate of Central Food Laboratory under sub-section (3) becomes conclusive evidence; and whether court could examine its contents for their evidentiary status in terms of relevancy and probative value or its contents are final are the other moot questions arising.

(2.) THE present revision application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against judgment and order dated 17th July, 1998 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Criminal Appeal No.13 of 1994 whereby he dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and order dated 31st March, 1994, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Jambusar, in Criminal Case No.2501 of 1988. By the said judgment, learned Judicial Magistrate convicted the accused-applicant herein, under Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the PFA Act' for sake of brevity), and sentenced him under Section 16 of the said Act to undergo six months' simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the applicant Mr.A.D. Shah raised the following main contentions: