KALIDAS DAMODARDAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-accused has been convicted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Ahmedabad of the offence punishable under section 16(l)(a)(i) read with section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentenced to suffer S.I. for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 /- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer SI. for a further period of three months. According to the prosecution in the above case, the accused carries on business in the name and style of Bhagwati Kirana Stores at Ahmedabad. The complainant-Gunvantrai who is a food inspector purchased 450 gms. of chilli powder from the accused at a price of Rs. 3.15 paise. He was duly informed that the chilli powder was being purchased for the purpose of getting it analysed. The chilli powder purchased from the accused was divided into three equal parts each of which was put in a separate bottle which was duly corked and sealed in the presence of a pancha. One of the bottles was given to the accused and one was sent to the public analyst who found that chilli powder contained oil soluble coal tar eye. As the chilli powder was found to be adulterated the complainant filed a complaint against the accused, who pleaded not guilty to the charge. It was his defence that he was a sleeping partner only in the firm to which the above shop belonged and that he had not sold any cnilli powder to the complainant. The learned Magistrate, however, relying on the evidence adduced by the prosecution, convicted the accused of the offence in question and sentenced him as stated above. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court, the accused has come in appeal to this court.

(2.) It is further submitted by Mr. Thakore that the complainant has not complied with rule 22 of the Rules, the relevant part of which reads as under-

(3.) In the present case, 150 grams of chilli powder was sent to the public analyst for analysis. According to Mr. Thakore, chilli powder cannot be treated as 'spices' specified at Sr. No. 1 and hence, it was necessary for the Complainant to send 200 grams of chilli powder to the public analyst as contemplated by entry at Sr. No. 37 which reads "Foods not specified." According to rule 5 of the Rules, "Standards of quality of the various articles to Food specified in appendix B to these rules are as defined in that appendix," Now entry as regards chillies (Lal Mirchi) occurs under the heading - "Spices and condiments" at Sr. No. A.05. The relevant part of the above entry reads as under:-