STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ANIL KUMAR KASHIBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 (1) (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as 'the Code' for short) against the order of acquittal dated 17. 9. 2003 passed by the JMFC, Chanasma in Criminal Case No. 211 of 1997 acquitting the accused/present respondent of the charges under section 7 (i), 7 (5) and 16 (1) (A) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration act, 1954 (herein after referred to as 'the Act' for short ). The impugned order dated 17. 9. 2003 is sought to be assailed in the present appeal on the various grounds.

(2.) HEARD Shri Patel, learned Addl. P. P. for the appellant State of Gujarat at length. Shri Patel has taken this court through the documents accompanying the appeal namely, the judgment and also the record of Criminal Case No. 211 of 1997, which was with him during the course of his submission.

(3.) BRIEF facts deserves to be set out as under :-The original complainant Food Inspector on 25. 10. 1996 visited the house of Kashibhai Patel at Gorad. The say of the complainant is that the son of Kashibhai namely the present accused/respondent anilkumar Kashibhai Patel was selling 'ghee', which was lying there in one tin. The tin of 'ghee' was containing about 10 to 12 kgs. of Ghee. In presence of panch witness, he purchased 450 grams of Ghee for analysis and the required notice in Form No. 6 under Rule 12 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (herein after referred to as 'the Rules' for short) was issued and paid Rs. 36/- towards purchase of sample. The required receipt was also obtained. The sample food Ghee was taken after stirring the same. The Ghee was taken in big bowl, popularly known in gujarati parlance Tapeli. From this bowl or vessel, Ghee was transferred into dried glass bottles. The Ghee was divided into three equal parts and collected in a glass bottles. The glass bottles were duly sealed in accordance with law and the label of Local health Authority were applied and signatures thereon were obtained. The panchnama was drawn and then the signatures were obtained thereon. One portion of sample food article was sent to the Public Analyst, Vadodara on 28. 10. 1996. The remaining two portions were handed over to Local Health Authority, mehsana. The seal impression and memorandum were sent to the Public Analyst on 28-10. 1996 separately. The report of the public Analyst indicated that the sample food article 'ghee' was adulterated and therefore, after obtaining necessary sanction for lodging prosecution, complaint came to be filed. After filing complaint, the necessary notice under Section 13 (2) of the Act came to be issued intimating to the accused that he has a right to have the sample tested at the Central Food Laboratory. The notice was duly served upon the respondent/accused and the receipt thereof is at Ex. 24. The trial Court after completion of the trial, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed in establishing the guilt on the part of the accused and therefore, the order of acquittal was recorded acquitting the accused of the charges on 17. 9. 2003. This order is impugned in the present appeal by the appellant State of Gujarat.