STATE Vs. NARSING LINGO DESHPANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from a judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belgaum City, acquitting the respondent who was charged with having committed offences under Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925.

(2.) THE facts of the case which led to the prosecution of the respondent under Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, were stated by me in the interlocutory judgment which this Court delivered on April 10, 1956. A sample of asafoetida, which was sold by the respondent to the Food Inspector on November 26, 1954, was sent to the Public Analyst for examination. It was found to contain alcohol extract which was 13.95 per cent. and foreign matters, namely, gum and woody fibres. One of its contents was also a dye called 'Metanil Yellow'. The Public Analyst issued a certificate accordingly.

(3.) THE provisions of law material to the decision of this appeal are to be found in Rule 6(B)(ix) of the rules framed under the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, Clauses (a) and (ft) of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, and Clauses (a) and (6) of the proviso contained in Sub -section (2) of Section 4 of the Act. Rule 6(B)(ix) of the rules framed under the Act lays down : Asafoetida, in which the ash exceeds 20 per cent. the extract soluble in 90 per cent. alcohol is less than 25 per cent. and in which there is the presence of colophony resin, galbanum resin, ammoniacum resin or any other foreign resin detected, shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to be not of the nature, substance or quality which it purports to be. Clause (a) of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, provides: Any person who sells or causes to be sold or offers for sale to the prejudice of the purchaser any article of food which is not of the nature, substance or quality demanded by or on behalf of the purchaser, shall on conviction be punished' with imprisonment according as the offence is a first or a second offence. Clause (6) of Sub -section (1) of Section 4 says: Any person who manufactures or offers, keeps or exposes for sale any article of food which is not of the nature, substance or quality which it purports to be' shall be similarly punished. The proviso contained in Sub -section (2) of Section 4 of the Act reads as follows: Provided that no offence shall be deemed to have been committed under this section (section 4) in the following cases, that is to say - (a) where any matter or ingredient not injurious to health has been added to the article of food because such matter or ingredient is required for the production or preparation thereof as an article of commerce in a state fit for carriage or consumption and not fraudulently to increase the bulk, weight or measure of the food or conceal the inferior quality thereof; (b) where any matter or ingredient not injurious to health has been added to or mixed with or abstracted from any article of food, before the sale thereof, the seller has brought to the notice of the purchaser, by means of a label conforming to such conditions as may be prescribed by rules in this behalf, etc.