HARKANT L SHUKLA Vs. DINESH KUMAR D BUDDHBHATTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD ld. Counsel Mr. RC Kakkad for the petitioner- original complainant.

(2.) THE present application for leave to appeal is preferred by the petitioner -Chief Officer of Khambhalia Municipality, challenging the order of acquittal recorded by ld. JMFC, Khambhalia in Criminal Complaint no. 322 of 1992 whereby respondent No. 1 accused has been acquitted from the offences punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration act (hereinafter referred to as the PFA Act)

(3.) THE ld. JMFC has recorded a finding of acquittal on the following grounds; viz (i) sample collected by the Food Inspector was not in strict compliance of the statutory provisions of the Rules framed under the PFA act, and (ii) the complainant Food Inspector was not competent and trained food Inspector required to be appointed in compliance with Rule 8 of the rules framed under PFA Act and, therefore, drawing of sample by him and act of filing of the complaint by him, can not sustain in the eyes of law. In support of the reasons assigned by the ld. JMFC for acquitting the accused. ld. JMFC placed reliance on the following decisions viz (i) 1993 (2)FAC 238, (ii)1994 (l) FAC 185 and (iii) 1987 (1) FAC 44. The ratio of the aforesald decisions, being squarely applicable to the facts of the present court, ld. JMFC placing reliance on the sald decisions, acquitted the accused.