M. KISHIN MULCHANDANI Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR, UDHAGAMANDALAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has been shown as A -2 in C.C.No.42 of 1993, pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Ootacamund. He is being prosecuted along with another for haveing allegedly committed offences punishable under section 7(i) & (ii) & 16(l)(a)(i) r/w Sec.2(ia) (a)(b) and (ix) (i) (k) and Rules 24 and 47 and or any suitable sections (queare) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules.

(2.) COMPLAINT preferred by the respondent before the Magistrate shows that on 11.12.1991 at 3.30 p.m. in the presence of his Sanitary Worker, he inspected M/s. Chelllarams, situated at Commercial Road, Ootacamund and obtained sample of Mukvas Supari kept in sealed bag. No lable was found affixed on the bag. Three samples were obtained from Arjun Lal, shown as A -1 in this prosecution, after payment of sale consideration. Sample of Mukvas sent for analysis showed that no lable was affixed, indicating that the sample contained permitted colours, in capital letters. Again, the sample was found to contain Saccharin, not permitted under the Rules. A prosecution was duly initiated, after substantial delay and the respondent thereafter sent an intimation under Sec. 13(2) of the Act.

(3.) MR . I. Subramaniam, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, when confronted with this contention fairly admitted that at this stage no material whatever exists to connect this petitioner with the offences alleged and slated that, if evidence stands brought on record at a later point of time, it may be possible for the prosecution to request the learned Magistrate and include this petitioner also as an accused under Sec.311 Crl. P.C.