KANTILAL MOTIBHAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel Shri. JB Pardiwala with Shri Divyesh Joshi for the applicant and Shri M. A. Patel, learned app for the State.

(2.) THE applicant Food Inspector, Navsari Nagar Palika has preferred this application under section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 herein after referred to as the 'code' for brevity], seeking leave to appeal against the order of acquittal dated 8/2/2005 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Navsari in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1995, acquitting the respondent / original accused of the charge of committing offence punishable under section 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 [hereinafter referred to as the 'pfa Act' for brevity], and quashing and setting aside the order of conviction passed by learned JMFC, Navsari in criminal Case No. 9940 of 1986 whereunder the respondent was convicted vide order dated 31/1/1995 for the offence punishable under section 7 and 16 of the PFA Act and sentenced to undergo six months R. I. And also ordered to pay fine of Rs. 1,000=00, in default thereof to further undergo s. I. for a period of three months.

(3.) THE order impugned in this acquittal appeal is mainly based upon the denial of reasonable opportunity to the accused to have the sample further tested by Central Food Laboratory as the notice under section 13 (2) of the PFA Act had been issued belatedly. This Court, therefore, called for the records and proceedings vide order dated 17/1/2007 and kept the matter on 2/2/2007. On 2/2/2007 rule was issued against the respondent accused which was made returnable on 19/2/2007. The rule remained unserved against the respondent/original accused as per the remarks received from the Registry, that the rule could not be served upon the respondent as the ASI, Navsari town police station recorded statement on 9/2/2007 from one Rajendraprasad Chunilal Gandhi, brother of the accused that the accused along with his family left for US and the accused was not residing at the place mentioned. Today, this Court heard Shri. Pardiwala for the applicant at length and closely perused the records and proceedings of Criminal Case no. 9940 of 1986.