MOHAN MEAKIN LTD Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. It so transpires that a complaint was filed against the petitioner company in the Court of Special Magistrate, Economic Offences I Class, Lucknow, under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as Act). This complaint was filed on 5-9-1983 and the learned Magistrate summoned the accused persons, namely, Shri Bipin Kumar, Vijay Datt, Rajesh Mohan, Mohan Gold Water Breweries Ltd and Mohan Meakin Ltd. (Petitioner herein). By an order on the same date i e.5-9-1983 the accused persons were summoned for 5-10-1983. In the meantime, it so transpires that the accused moved an application for getting the sample tested by the Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta and it is alleged that a report from the said laboratory dated 31-5-1984 was received in the court which per annexure-4 to the affidavit indicates :-

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in view of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 13 of the Act this report would supersede the earlier report of the Public Analyst of U. P. on the basis of which the accused were charge-sheeted. Be that as it may, the accused had to bring this fact to the notice of me learned Magistrate by moving a proper application and sought his decision. In this view of the matter the present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pre-mature.