STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SUNIL BANSILAL JAIN VENDOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respective parties.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal in Regular Criminal Case No.20/1990 whereby learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Shahada acquitted the accused Nos.1 and 2 (present respondents) of the offences punishable under section 7(i) read with section 16(1)(a) and under section 7(v) read with section 16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

(3.) ON behalf of the prosecution, three witnesses including Food Inspector PW1 Arunkumar Khairnar, panch witness PW2 Rohit Panchal and PW3 Anil Dani, the Assistant Commissioner, came to be examined. After considering their evidence, learned Magistrate acquitted both the accused by his judgment dated 16-09-1995 on the ground that two reports i.e. report of Public Analyst and the report of Central Food Laboratory though identical, the data therein deferred, panch witness turned hostile and the Food Inspector did not follow the procedure.