MUNICIPAL BOARD MAINPURI Vs. KRISHNA MURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the Municipal Board, Mainpuri against the order dated 22-8-1972 of Sri U. S. Gautam Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mainpuri acquitting Krishna Murari Lal respondent of the charge under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) THE respondent, Krishna Murari Lal, was tried under Section 7 read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the complaint of the Food Inspector Sri D. S. Siraudia (P. W. 1). THE allegations against him were that the respondent on 7-2-1972 was found selling account and tea packets without having a licence as required by Rule 50 of the P.F.A. Rule 1955 at Tahsil Chandra, District Mainpuri. THE complaint as dated 10-2-1972.

(3.) IT appears from a perusal of the record that the statement of Sri B. S. Siraudia was recorded on 9-6-1972 and the charge was framed against the respondent on 26-6-1972. IT further appears that the case was postponed to 17-7-1972 for the cross-examination of the Food Inspection under Section 256 Criminal Procedure Code but he did not appear. The procedure adopted by the Court below was not correct. The trial of the case commenced as a warrant case and in a warrant case the duty lies on the Magistrate to secure attendance of the complainant and his witnesses for further cross-examination. The record does not show that any step was taken by the Court below to secure attendance either of the Food Inspector or any other witness. The Court below was in error in acquitting the respondent on account of the absence of the Food Inspector. IT was the duty of the Court below itself to secure attendance of the witnesses. The matter has been considered by me in detail in Municipal Board, Mainpuri v. Raja Ram, Cr. Appeal No. 3096 of 1972 (Since reported in 1976 A.C.C.). A copy of the judgment in that case is on the record of this case.