STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMJIBHAI FOGATBHAI SAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under S.378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dated 9-2-1996 passed by learned JMFC, Banvad, in Criminal Case No. 346 of 1985 acquitting the accused / present respondent of the offence under S.7 and S.16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). This Court (Coram : A. N. Divecha, J.) granted leave and admitted the appeal vide order dated 30-10-1996.

(2.) THE case of the appellant in short is that the Food Inspector - original complainant on 9-4-1985 visited the shop of the accused along with helper Shri. K. B. Bang and notified his intention of collecting beverage known in vernacular as "Lemon Soda". He purchased 3 bottles of lemon soda on payment of Rs. 18-60 and obtained receipt thereof from the vendor - accused. The sample was collected in presence of panch witness Shri. Aruna Darsi. Notice under R.12 Form VI was issued indicating his intention to send sample article to the Public Analyst for the purpose of analysis. The bottles were not open by the Food Inspector and he applied the requisite seal on the bottles keeping them in the same condition. The bottles were wrapped and sealed in strict compliance with the provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). The seal of Local Health Authority was also affixed on the bottles containing Sr. No. 8 / FD / AR / JT / JAM dated 3-1-1985. The panchanama was drawn of the incident of collecting the sample which bears the signature of accused and the panch witness. The notice under Form No. VI is produced at exhibit 44. The panchnama is produced at exhibit 47. On 10-4-1985 memorandum was prepared in six copies, a copy thereof is produced before the Court at exhibit - 48. Copy of the memorandum along with one sealed bottle of sample food article was properly packed in a wooden box and sent to Public Analyst for analysis at Bhuj and remaining two parts of sample bottles were sent to Local Health Authority at Rajkot as required under the law. The receipt received from Public Health Authority is produced at exhibit 49 and the receipt from the Public Analyst is produced at exhibit 50. The Public Analyst indicated in his report that the sample food article was not in conformity with the standards laid down under Item A.01.01 of 'carbonated water' under R.1955 as the element of saccharine should not have exceeded 100 ppm, which was found to be 135 ppm. The report of the Public Analyst produced at exhibit - 55 along with relevant papers was submitted to Local Authority for obtaining appropriate consent for lodging prosecution. The Local Health Authority accorded the sanction on the basis of the report of the Public Analyst and the relevant documents submitted to him. The complaint came to be lodged against the present respondent - original accused. After lodging the complaint the information of the same was sent to Local Health Authority on 7-11-1985. Local Health Authority therefore issued notice under S.13(2) of the Act, with a copy of the report of the Public Analyst, affording an opportunity to the accused to have the sample further tested at the end of Central Food Laboratory. The acknowledgment card showing its receipt is produced at exhibit 56.

(3.) AFTER elaborate discussions on the issues, the trial Court has given benefit of doubt to the accused on the count that evidences are not sufficient to bring home guilt of the accused. This order dated 9-2-1996 is impugned in the present appeal.