STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RAJKUMAR NANDKISHOR DEVDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State, being dissatisfied with the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalgaon, dated 31.07.1985 in Regular Criminal Case No.82/83 acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 2(1)(a) & (j) read with Section 7, punishable under Sections 16 & 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the said Act), filed Criminal Appeal No.561/89 (Bombay No.851/85), while the other appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.562/89 (Bombay No.868/85) is also filed by the State challenging the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalgaon, dated 31.07.1985 in Regular Criminal Case No.118/83, again acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 2(1)(a) & (j) read with Section 7, punishable under Sections 16 & 17 of the said Act.

(2.) BOTH the cases are arising out of the same transaction and incident took place on 19.11.1982. The State of Maharashtra, through the Food Inspector P.M.Kulkarni, Jalgaon, prosecuted the firm known as M/s Milan Mithai, Khandesh Shopping Complex, Jalgaon, alongwith its partners i.e. original accused nos.1 to 4 - Rajkumar Nandkishor Devda, Nandkishor Motilal Devda, Smt.Sarubai Bansilal Galhot and Shri Jaikumar Nandkishor Devda. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, while framing charge, discharged accused nos.2, 3 and 4, while charge is framed only against accused nos.1 & 5 (present respondents) in both cases. The State has not challenged the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate so far as regards discharge of accused nos.2, 3 and 4 is concerned. In both the cases, trial proceeded against accused nos.1 and 5 and the prosecution examined the Food Inspector, one another witness and certain documents are got proved. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, after considering the evidence on record, acquitted both the accused in both the criminal cases. The State, being dissatisfied by the said order as referred to above, filed two separate appeals and for the sake of convenience, both the appeals are being disposed of by the common order.

(3.) IT is the further case of the prosecution that after receipt of the report of Public Analyst, a request was made to the Joint Commissioner, Food & Drugs Administration, Thane, for giving consent to prosecute the accused, as required under Section 20 of the said Act. Some information as regards the Firm Milan Mithai and about its partners was also collected from the Local Health Authority and after receipt of the consent order from the Joint Commissioner, Food & Drugs Administration, Thane, the Food Inspector has filed Regular Criminal Case No.82/83 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalgaon, so far as regards the food article Rajbhog is concerned, while so far as regards the food article Milk is concerned, the Food Inspector has filed Criminal Appeal No.118/83, against the same accused. The evidence of complainant Food Inspector is recorded, certain documents are also got proved through his evidence. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, after considering the evidence, as referred to above, discharged accused nos.2, 3 & 4, while framed charged against accused nos.1 & 5 and thereafter given an opportunity to the prosecution to lead evidence and after considering the same, acquitted the accused in both the criminal cases concluding that the report of the Public Analyst suffers from several infirmities, the material witnesses are not examined by the prosecution and even there is non compliance of certain mandatory provisions. He accordingly given benefit to the accused. The said order of acquittal in both the criminal cases being challenged by filing two separate appeals by the State.