DAHYABHAI KALUBHAI SOLANKI Vs. N J INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gujarat Pollution Control Board through its Law Officer, has filed both these appeals against the order of acquittal for the offence under Sec. 39 read with Sec. 40 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (For short, "the Air Act, 1981).

(2.) It was alleged against the respondents-accused persons that they did not provide port holes, platforms conveniently located for easy access to port holes and all other necessary facilities for taking samples or emission from chimney in the industrial units of the respondents-accused and thereby committed offences punishable under Sec. 39 read with Sec. 40 of the Air Act, 1981. The complaint is lodged against the accused persons on basis of the default data-sheet at Exh. 5 and on basis of the authority of lodging the complaint as per the resolution at Exh. 6. On inspection of the factory units of the respondents the aforesaid drawback were noticed and report was accordingly prepared. It is stated in the report that there was chimney and polluted air was emitting thereform. The said inspection-report is at Exh. 17, in both the Criminal Cases.

(3.) Considering the evidence of the complainant, Dahyabhai Kalubhai Solanki, and that of Dhaval Laxmikant Bhatt and P. K. Gohil, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, by the impugned order of acquittal, held that the complainant - Board failed to prove that the Ahmedabad area was declared as an air pollution control area under Sec. 19 of the Air Act, 1981, inasmuch as the recognition was not by reference to a map or by publication in the official gazette and at least in two local newspapers for wide publicity. On this ground and on the ground that the prosecution case was not proved on facts, the learned Chief Metropolitas Magistrate, by his order dated April 8, 1995, in both the cases, ordered to acquit the respondents-accused. Both these appeals are preferred against the aforesaid order of acquittal.