STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHAGCHAND SADHUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State, being aggrieved by an order of acquittal passed on 29-9-1990 by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Junagadh in Criminal Case No. 5022 of 1984 wherein the accused were tried for an offence punishable under Sec. 7 read with Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, has preferred this appeal.

(2.) On 2-8-1984, complainant Babulal Patel, P.W. 1 visited the shop of the accused No. 1 who was dealing in food articles. In the presence of panch Ambalal Nagjibhai, P.W. 2, after giving introduction to the accused No. 1, Food Inspector collected a sample of chilly powder from him under a panchnama. The sample was collected from a plastic bag whereon name of the accused No. 2 was printed. One of the sample bottle was forwarded to the Public Analyst for analysis and on being found that the sample contained non-permitted coaltar dye, the Public Analyst opined that the sample is adulterated. On receiving the report, after launching the prosecution, the copy of the same was forwarded to the accused in compliance with Sec. 13(2) of the Act. On appreciation of the evidence, the trial Court acquitted the accused, and hence the State has preferred this appeal.

(3.) The trial Court held that the sample was not collected in the manner provided in Sec. 11(1)(b); That there was delay by the Public Analyst in forwarding the report and hence there was breach of Rule 7(3) of the Rules; That dry and clean bottles were not used and hence there was a breach of Rule 14; That panchas being hostile, it cannot be said that the sample is collected in compliance with Sec. 10(7) of the Act, and so far as accused No. 2 is concerned, intimation as required under Sec. 13(2) of the Act is wanting. The trial Court, therefore, held that the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused, and accordingly, acquitted the accused.