RAMESH CHANDRA AGAIWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions have been connected by the order dated 25-5-1982 and therefore they are being disposed of by a com mon order,

(2.) THE Chief Food Inspector, Bijnor took a sample of palm oil on 6 -10 -1977 from a shop of which Sukhdeo Rai Kapoor is owner. As per the report dated 24 -11 -1977 of the Public Analyst to the U. P. Government, the sample was found to be adulterated. After obtaining sanction from the Local Health Authority, a complaint was filed against Sukhdeo Rai Kapoor for his prosecution under Section 7/16 prevention of Food Adulter ation Act. THE statement of the Food Inspector was recorded under Sec tion 244, Cr. P. C. wherein he stated that he had seen three tins of palm oil in the shop and on the tins, Brand "amrit Banaspati" was written. THE vendor Sukhdeo Rai Kapoor moved an application on 30 -7 -1981 stating that he had purchased ten sealed tins of palm oil on 27 -9 -1977 from a firm M/s. Khairati Ram Lalta Prasad, Bijnor of which Ramesh Chandra Agarwal is the proprietor and the said oil had been manufactured by Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. It was also stated that the Food Inspector had taken sample from one of the aforesaid sealed tins of palm oil and it was in the same condition in which it was bought from distributor. He had also sent a registered letter to the manufacturer Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd. , Ghaziabad on 10 -10 -1977 but they gave no reply. It was accordingly prayed that the distributor and manufacturer be summoned as accused under Section 20 -A of P. F. Act. Along with the application the original cash memo regarding purchase of the palm oil was also annexed. THE learned Magistrate by the order dated 30 -7 -1981 summoned (1) Manager, Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd. , Ghaziabad and (2) Ramesh Chandra Agarwal, Proprietor Khairati Ram Lalta Prasad for their prosecution along with Sukhdeo Rai Kapoor. It appears that the Manager of M/s. Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd. , filed a revision against the aforesaid order being criminal revision No. 92 of 1981 and the same was allowed by Sri -R. A. Singh, learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor by the judgment and order dated 24 -10 -1981 and the order of the Magistrate was set aside. THEreafter Ramesh Chandra Agarwal moved an application before the Magistrate on 23 -11 -1981 praying that the proceedings against him be dropped as the order dated 30 -7 - 1981 had been set aside by the learned Sessions Judge in revision which was filed by Manager, Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. THE learned Magistrate held that this was no stage to pass an order of discharge in favour of Ramesh Chandra Agarwal and the matter could be considered at the stage of framing charge which would be done after recording statement of Chief Food Inspector. THE applicant Ramesh Chandra Agarwal then moved another application on 2 -2 -1982 for recalling the aforesaid order dated 5 -12 -1981 of the Magistrate but the same was also rejected on 10 -2 -1982. THEreafter he filed revision before the learned Sessions Judge but the same was dismissed summarily on 19 -3 -1982. THE present Criminal Misc. Application No. 2239 of 1982 under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed for quashing the first order of the Magistrate dated 30 -7 -1981 by which Ramesh Chandra Aearwal was summoned and the subsequent orders dated 5 -12 -1981 and 10 -2 -1982. Criminal Misc. Application No. 3162 of 1982 has been filed by Sukhdeo Rai Kapoor for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Misc. Case No. 1034 of 1981 which is pending against him.