TOOFAN GHOSH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State in both the matters and perused the record.

(2.) By these two applications, the applicants have sought quashing of proceedings of Complaint Case No.736 of 1996 "Nagar Swastha Adhikari Vs. Toofan Ghosh and another", under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as PFA Act); pending before the court of A.C.J.M., Agra.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants contend that the applicant Toofan Ghosh is holding post of Deputy Manager of Hotel Novotal (now known as Hotel Trident) and has taken over charge of the post of Deputy Manager of the hotel after transfer of former Deputy Manager Mohit Nirula, the applicant of Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.1390 of 2016, who after transfer on 12.4.1995 has joined at Ahmadabad; that the license for food and beverages was issued in the name of applicant Mohit Nirula, Deputy Manager of hotel Novotel for the period from 1.4.1993 to 31.3.1994, from 1.4.1994 to 31.3.1995 and thereafter from 1.4.1995 to 31.3.1996; that according to the prosecution on 13.6.1995, a sample of curd was collected from the hotel Novotel of applicants by Surendra Singh, the then Food Inspector of Nagar Nigam, Agra; that as per report of Analyst dated 11.7.1995 the sample of curd was not found to the standards prescribed; that on the basis of above report of Public Analyst, U.P., Lucknow, a complaint case was filed by Nagar Swastha Adhikari, Nagar Maha Palika, Agra against the applicants and hotel under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954; that on 7.8.1996 the applicants moved an application U/s 13 (2) of PFA Act to the Court for getting the sample of curd re-tested and analysed by the Central Food Laboratory; that on 15.10.1996 the Magistrate directed to send the sample for re-testing at Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta and on 17.12.1996 observing that sample has returned from Calcutta directed to send it for re-testing at Central Food Laboratory, Pune; that the copy of order-sheet filed at Annexure-7 shows that the sample was actually sent for re-testing on 2.12.2014 and report of Central food Laboratory dated 1.1.2015 was received after one month of sending the sample on 2.12.2014; that the above facts show that the sample of curd taken in the year 1995 was sent for re-testing after inordinate delay and the report dated 1.1.2015 of Central Food Laboratory, Mysore after a period of about more than 18 years has no evidenciary value.