HARI OIL AND DAL MILLS Vs. SUKHMAL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revisions under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short the Code) are directed against the orders dated 4th October, 1986 and 18th April, 1985, summoning the applicants under Section 20-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (for short the Act).

(2.) THE facts of the case are few and simple and they are these. It appears that proceedings under Section 7/16 of the Act were pending against the opposite parties for the sale of adulterated oil. But lateron it was stated by the opposite parties that the said oil was purchased from the applicant, who could be summoned under the provisions of Section 20-A of the Act. THE applicant was summoned by the impugned orders.

(3.) EX Abundanti Cautela, the relevant provisions of Section 20 may also be set out as follows :-