LAWS(GJH)-1987-9-16

PARLE BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THAKORE PRATAPJI KACHARAJI

Decided On September 28, 1987
Parle Beverages Pvt Ltd., And Others Appellant
V/S
Thakore Pratapji Kacharaji And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present application under Sec. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings in the Criminal Case No. 17 of 1987 pending before the learned JMFC Sidhpur.

(2.) On perusal of the complaint which is annexed as Annexure-A to the petition it appears that the complaint was filed under Secs. 272 and 273 of the IPC as also under Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant is doing the business of selling cold drinks in the Court compound at Sidhpur. He was also keeping Thums Up drink manufactured and supplied by the original accused present petitioners. It is also alleged that on 15/05/1987 a customer asked for Thums Up bottle which the complainant had purchased from the Garden Hindu Hotel who are the distributors of Thums Up for Sidhpur vide bill No. 3332. When the complainant took the bottle of Thums Up he found that it was containing insects. It was a sealed bottle. On realising that the drink of Thums Up was infected with insects a notice was given to the accused through his lawyer but no reply was given by the accused. The complainant therefore filed the complaint making all the required allegations for the commission of the offences under Secs. 272 and 273 IPC. He has also produced the said bottle before the learned Magistrate and also requested to send it for the report of the Chemical Analyser. On the said complaint the learned Magistrate has issued process against the present petitioners for the offences under Secs. 272 and 273 IP Code only.

(3.) It may be stated that when the petition was originally filed the entire attack was with regard to the provisions of the Act but at the time of hearing Mr. S. K. Zaveri the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners learnt that process was issued under Secs. 272 and 273 IPC and he sought permission to amend the petition. Permission was granted. Now he has amended the petition accordingly.