STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. MEENAKSHI ACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the State against the order, of the Court of the Additional First Class Magistrate, No. II. Madurai acquitting the three accused-respondents of the offence of contravening Sections 2 (i) (a) and (1 ). 7 (i) and 16 a) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act read with clause A in Appendix B to Rule 5 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts are: P. W. 1 is a Municipal Sanitary Inspector cum Food Inspector. On 11-9-1969, at 11 A. M. he along with his maistry went for taking samples of food articles. They found the Ice Cream push cart before No. 1. Bhagavan Chetti Lane when they proceeded along the workshop road. The push cart Ice Cream belongs to the Ice Cream Company. 60 Munichalai Road. P. W. 1 enquired the 3rd accused who was the salesman. The 3rd accused represented that he was taking the ice cream for sale. P. W. 1 thereafter purchased 600 grams of ice cream sold by the 3rd accused; P. W. 1 paid Rupees 4. 50. He also obtained a receipt from the 3rd accused. He divided the ice cream and put them in three clean bottles. He added 16 drops of Formalin in each of the bottles and sealed them. He gave one bottle to the 3rd accused under acknowledgment. One bottle was sent to the Public Analyst. Ex. P. 8 is the report of the Analyst which showed that the ice cream was deficient in fat to the extent of 59 per cent, and was therefore adulterated.

(3.) THE Plea of the first accused is that she is the proprietor of the Company, She stated that the second accused is not the Manager of the Company. The 3rd accused was the salesman. The second accused's plea is one of denial. The 3rd accused admitted the sample being taken by P. W. 1.