OM PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT stood surety for one Achal Singh who was being prosecuted for an offences Under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Achal Singh did not appear in spite of issue of processes. Applicant was then directed to produce the accused on 211-19 (8 or to show cause why the action should not be taken against him. Notice was served on the applicant on 27-10. 1968 personally. He, however, failed to show cause although several dates were fixed for the purpose. The Magistrate therefore, forfeited his bond and directed for the realisation of Rs. 1u00 as penalty for the forfeiture.

(2.) APPLICANT came up in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge but it was dismissed.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the applicant has argued that the bond executed before the Food Inspector could not be forfeited by the court. Reliance was placed on the case of Kameshwar Bhartia v. State of Assam.