ARVIND RAM SWAROOP MANIYAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE made returnable forthwith by consent in all the four matters, as the point involved in all these matters is common though the articles seized under the provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 differ in each case.

(2.) HEARD Mr. Bora for the petitioners in all the proceedings and Mr. Choudhary, A. P. P. for the State.

(3.) THE respondent-Food Inspector of Jalgaon, on or about 19-7-1993 and 20-7-1993 seized from the four petitioners certain food articles in large quantity, on an assumption that they were adulterated articles. In each case, the Food Inspector himself exercised the jurisdiction, which in fact, does not vest in him in law, to hand over the goods in the custody of the petitioners themselves on certain bond, subject to the condition that the articles should not be sold until further orders. The samples taken from the seized articles were sent to the public analyst and some time before 2-9-1993, the reports of the public analyst, which were adverse to the interest of the present petitioners, were received.