(1.) The present revision has been filed by the revisionist Shashi Kant Gupta against the impugned judgment and order dated 17.4.1985 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi in Shashi Kant Gupta v. State of U.P., under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, P.S. Garotha, district Jhansi. By the impugned judgment and order the lower Appellate Court had set aside the trial Court's order and had remanded the case back for rehearing.
(2.) The factual matrix were that the sample of 450 grams of whole turmeric was taken by PW.1, O S. Sengar, Food Inspector from the shop of the revisionist on 29 9 1981 at 3.15 P M. after giving notice in form-6 (Ex Ka-1). The receipt of the purchase (Ex Ka-2), inspection note (Ex. Ka-3) and Form No. 7 (Code slip) (Ex Ka-4) were prepared by him and purchase receipt was got signed by the revisionist at the time of taking of sample. He sealed the sample into three philes, the code slip was pasted and one sample was dispatched for analysis to the Public Analyst. Other two samples were deposited with the local health authority/Chief Medical Officer, Jhansi. The public analysist vide its report dated 9.11.1981, Ex. Ka-5 opined that the sample was adulterated as it contained more than five per cent of the insect damages matter. After receipt of the public analyst report sanction for prosecution was applied for and was granted by Local Health Authority/ C.M.O. on 20.2.1982. Pursuant it the complaint was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Jhansi by the Food Inspector on 19.3.1982 against the revisionist. Notice under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, was sent to the revisionist accused on 25.3.1982 by Food Clerk and the same was received by him. Charge was framed, against accused, on 4.9.1982 under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, which was denied by him and hence he was tried.
(3.) In the trial, the prosecution examined Food Inspector, O.S. Sengar as P.W 1 and food clerk, J.B. Singh as P.W. 2. No otner witness was produced by the prosecution.