STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SOMDAS PANDURANG WANJARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-appellant. None present for the respondents/acquitted accused persons. Though it is such a situation as to absence of the respondents and their Advocate, the present appeal is taken up for final hearing, as it was prolonged since the year 2001 and nearly 11 years have elapsed when the question before bench is whether the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is required to be interfered with. Initially, all the 11 accused, who are the Manager, President and officer bearers of M/s. Hanuman Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sanstha, Dhargaon, were charged for various offences punishable under Sections 7(i) read with Section 2 (ia) (a) punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(ii), Section 7 (i) read with Section 2 (ia) (a) punishable under Section 16 (1)(a)(i) and Section 7(v) read with Rule 50 punishable under Section 16 (1) (a) (ii) read with Section 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (as amended) and Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (as amended).

(2.) Charge was framed against all the accused. The trial was conducted in which three prosecution witnesses were examined including the complainant - Food Inspector and two panch witnesses, in whose presence, alleged samples were taken from one of the milk containers/cans, out of total 8 milk cans. Finding the evidence of complainant - PW 1 not reliable to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences charged, mainly due to hostility of both panch witnesses, the Trial Court acquitted all the accused persons of the offences mentioned above. The said impugned judgment and order passed on 16th October, 2000 is challenged by the State in this appeal.

(3.) Considering the scope of the present appeal of challenging the order of acquittal, though there is none present for the respondents to argue the matter, it is thought fit to proceed further with the appeal to hear the appeal on merits and as such this Court has gone through the evidence and record and proceedings with the help of the learned A.P.P. The arguments of learned A.P.P. are also heard.