STATE Vs. DHANAKODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the Judgment of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvannamalaj, acquitting the accused who has been charged for an offence under section 7 (i) and 16 (1-a) (a) (i) read with section 2 (1-a) (a) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) ON 31st July, 1978, P.W-1, Food Inspector, Kilpennathur, purchased 700 ml. of Cow-s milk kept for sale by the accused at Tiruvannamalai - Tindivanam Road. He delivered the milk so purchased into three equal parts and sealed them in three clean dry bottles, and sent one such bottle to the Public Analyst and the other two to the Local (Health) Authority. The report of the Analyst, Exhibit P-4, showed that the sample is deficient in solids-not, fat to the extent of at least 49 per cent. The Food Inspector then laid the complaint.

(3.) A reference to the complaint filed by the Food Inspector shows that it was filed on 12th April, 1978 before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai. A notice under section 13 (2) which is mandatory, has been served on the accused on 3rd April, 1978, as evidenced by the endorsement in Exhibit P-6. Section 13 (2) runs thus: