STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PRADIP KUMAR VRAJLAL KANDOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 378 of Criminal Procedure code, 1973 ('code', for short) has been preferred challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and order passed by learned Magistrate First Class, Mandvi kutch ('ld. Magistrate', for short) dated 10. 3. 1998 in Criminal Case No. 206/1993. By virtue of the impugned judgment and order, the Ld. Magistrate was pleased to acquit both the respondents herein, who were accused in the aforesaid criminal case for the offence punishable under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food adulteration Act, 1954 ('act', for short ).

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is as under:

(3.) FOOD Inspector, Shri R. P. Christian, visited the sweet-mart shop of the respondents on 24. 9. 1992, at about 18. 15 hours, and collected sample of "bundi Ladoo". The food Inspector collected the sample, packed and sealed the sample as per the requirements laid down under the Act and the prevention of Food Adulteration Rules ('rules', for short), in presence of Panchas. The sample was sent for analysis and was found to be adulterated. After obtaining due sanction for launching the criminal prosecution against both the accused, the Food inspector Mr. Christian filed criminal complaint against both the accused in the Court of Ld. Magistrate. As the accused did not plead guilty, the Ld. Magistrate recorded the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The testimony of the complainant Food Inspector mr. Christian was recorded at Ex. 38. The testimony of panch witness Salemamad bhachoo was recorded at Ex. 64. No more witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The prosecution produced relevant documentary evidence in this case. After the prosecution completed their evidence, Ld. Magistrate recorded the further statements of both the accused under Section 313 of the code, wherein the accused generally denied the allegations levelled against them and stated that false case was filed against them. After appreciating the evidence on record, and hearing the arguments advanced on behalf of both the sides, Ld. Magistrate delivered the impugned judgment, and he was pleased to acquit both the accused persons.