PARMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision arises out of the judgment and order dated 8.7.1982 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge. Varanasi, in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1982 confirming the judgment and order dated 4.1.1982 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate. Varanasi, in Criminal case No. 960 of 1981 whereby which he convicted the revisionist under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- either to R.I. for three months.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionist has submitted that no sanction was accorded by the competent authority and hence the prosecution is bad in law and accordingly conviction and sentence should be quashed.

(3.) IN the instant case since sanction to prosecution was not accorded by proper authority under Section 20 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, no prosecution can be started against any person for violation of any of the provisions of the said Act. Accordingly I find that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is bad in law and the conviction and sentence cannot be maintained.