STATE OF GUJ Vs. NARAYANBHAI HIMMATBHAI RANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the udgement and order of acquittal dated 02. 07. 1988 passed by the Sessions Judge, Baroda in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 1986, whereby the accused has been acquitted of the charges leveled against him.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant, upon information, visited the shop of the accused herein and after introducing himself as a Food Inspector to accused, purchased sample of milk in the presence of panch witness and in compliance of provisions under the PFA Act. According to the report of Public Analyst, the muddamal sample was found adulterated.

(3.) IT was contended by Mr. Kodekar, learned APP that the judgement and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondent. Learned APP has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence.