S SHANMUGAVELAN Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who have been arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 6, are facing trial for the alleged offences under Sections 7(ii) & 16(1)(a)(i) read with 2(ix)(g) and (k) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and Rule 32(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, in the case pending in S.T.C. No. 2053 of 2009 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli, and they have come forward with this petition seeking for the relief of quashing the complaint pending in S.T.C. No. 2053 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No. I, Tiruenlveli. The case of the prosecution is to the effect that the 1st accused is the proprietor of a medical shop by name "Bye-Pass Medicals", Tirunelveli. Accused Nos. 2 to 5 are the Directors of the 6th Accused Company, namely M/s. Quick Silver Health Care (P) Limited. The 6th accused Company, is the Re-packers of the food article, namely Glucose-D, manufactured by M/s. Maize Products, Kathwada, Ahmedabad. It is alleged that the Food Inspector, Tirunelveli Corporation, on his routine inspection, inspected the 1st accused's Medical Shop, namely 'Bye-Pass Medicals', on 26.6.2008 at 1.30 p.m. and found that the 1st accused was selling Glucose-D Powder. It is stated in the complaint that the shop owner, namely the 1st accused, was possessing valid licence. Thereafter, the Food Inspector informed Accused No. 1 that he is taking sample of Glucose-D Packets for sending the same to Public Analyst, Food Analysis Laboratory, for analysis. Accordingly, the Food Inspector has taken 100 gm. sample each from 10 packets. On enquiry, accused No. 1 stated that he purchased the said Glucose-D from the 6th Accused Company, for which accused Nos. 2 to 5 are the Directors. It is the further case of the prosecution, as per the complaint, that on sending the samples for analysis, the Public Analyst sent a Report, after examination of samples, opining that the said sample is misbranded, as it is not labelled in accordance with the requirements of Rule 32(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.

(2.) After receipt of the Report of the Public Analyst, dated 30.7.2008, the Food Inspector, Tirunelveli Corporation, has filed a Complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli, alleging offences under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(ii), 2(ix)(k) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and Rule 32(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The said complaint was taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli. Being aggrieved against the said complaint, on the ground that no offence as alleged in the complaint is made out, the petitioners have preferred the present petition seeking to quash the complaint.

(3.) Mr. R. Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioners, would put-forth the following contentions: