M N KATHARMYTHEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners approach this Court with a prayer to call for the records in S.T.C.No.2051 of 2009, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli and to quash the same.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the complaint has been filed on 26.5.2009, but 13(2) notice has been issued on 31.12.2009 after 7 months from the complaint and hence, the petitioner's choice for sending the sample to the Public Analyst has been curtailed; moreover, there is no evidence to show that how and in what manner, the sample is misbranded; the complaint suffers from procedural illegality, because it has been filed belated i.e. after 2 years from the date of sampling the food and after 18 months from the date of receipt of Analyst's report and thus he prayed for quashing the complaint in S.T,C.No.2051 of 2009 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.l, Tirunelveli. To substantiate his case, he relied upon the following decisions: