RASIKLAL MOHANLAL SHAH Vs. MOHANLAL NARANDAS GANDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. P. DESAI J.

(2.) RASIKLAL Mohanlal Shah serving as a Food Inspector Navsari Nagar Palika Navsari in the year 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) went to the shop of Mohanlal Narandas Gandhi (hereinafter referred to as the accused ) on 21-2-1979 and demanded a sample of Vanila Ice-cream in the presence of another person who was called upon to act as a panch. The sample was accordingly given by the accused and it was divided into three parts as per the requirement of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (hereinafter referred to as the rules) and also sealed as per the requirement of the said rules. Slips were affixed on the said three bottles on which necessary particulars were mentioned also as per the requirements of the rules. One of the sealed bottles alongwith the memorandum in the prescribed form alongwith the specimen seal was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis. The remaining two sample bottles were sent to the local Health Authority namely District Health Officer at Valsad. The Public Analyst on analysis of the sample found that it did not confer to the standard laid down under the rules. Public Health Authority was moved for according sanction to prosecute the accused for offences punish able under sec. 7 read with sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The sanction was granted by the said authority and thereafter complaint was filed against the accused by the complainant in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Navsari on 31/03/1979. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. The learned Judicial Magistrate after appreciating the evidence recorded before him reached a conclusion that the guilt of the accused was established and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00 in default to further R.I. for one month. The accused being dissatisfied with the said judgment of conviction and sentence filed Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1980 in the Court of Sessions Judge Valsad at Navsari. The learned Sessions Judge Valsad at Navsari who heard the appeal accepted the request made by the original accused in writing at Ex. 11 to call for the two sample bottles which were sent to the Local Health Authority to find out whether the said bottles were properly sealed and packed or not. The learned advocate who appeared for the original complainant in the appellate Court objected to this application. He made an endorsement I object. The learned Sessions Judge did not pass any speaking order below the said application but only directed that a summons be issued as prayed for. The summons was accordingly issued to the Local Health Authority to send some conversant person with two sample bottles. The District Health Officer directed one Shri C. B Mehta District Sanitary Inspector Health Department of his office to go to the Sessions Court as per the said summons and he accordingly went to the Sessions Court on 28-5-80 and produced the packet containing two sealed bottles with a written pursis Ex. 14. The learned Sessions Judge on perusing the evidence and on examining the bottles which were produced before him reached a conclusion that the conviction of the accused was not proper on the evidence recorded before the learned Magistrate. He accordingly allowed the appeal. Being dissatisfied by the said judgment of acquittal rendered by the learned Sessions Judge the original complainant has filed this appeal.