REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant

V/S

TRILOKCHAND BHIVRAJ JAIN Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MOHAMED ISMAIL V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPALITY,JAMMU V. BALMUKUND [REFERRED TO]
LAXMANDAS SARVOTTAMADAS DOSHI & CO V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
EMPEROR V. LESLIE GWILT [REFERRED TO]
EMPEROR V. PURUSHOTTOM HARJIVAN SHAH [REFERRED TO]
GOKULCHAND DWARDADAS MORARKA V. KING [REFERRED TO]
ENAYAT ALI NAZAR ALI BHORI V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 1212 OF 1973,DECIDED ON 11-2-1975,BY VIMADALAL,J [REFERRED TO]
CRI APPEAL NO 667/1977 [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA,CRIRA NO 141/1975 [REFERRED TO]
KASSIM KANJU POOKUNJI V. KK RAMKRISHNA PILLAI,CRIA NO 29 OF 1968 [REFERRED TO]
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATIONS NOS 63,64 AND 65 /1976 [REFERRED TO]
STATE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 180/1966 [REFERRED TO]
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 1327/1973 [REFERRED TO]
RAJALDAS GURUNAMAL PAMANANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SHAH ASHU JAIWANT VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MANGILAL CHAMANAJI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
MARY LAZRADO VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
UMAR HAYATH KHAN VS. MAHABOOBUNNISSA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. CHHOTEKHAN NANNEKHAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. LAXMINARAYAN AGRAWAL [REFERRED TO]
KARSANDAS G RAVALIYA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
BHAVRILA S O CHISULAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. VILAS DESHARATH SHATE [REFERRED TO]
H T JADHAV VS. RAMNIKLAL S O THAKERSEE [REFERRED TO]
JAMSHEDPUR NOTIFIED AREA COMMITE VS. NIRANJAN PAUL [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Maharashtra has come in appeal against the order of acquittal, dated 29th September 1975, passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, and Judicial Magistrate, First Class Dhulia, acquitting respondent Trilokchand Bhivraj Jain, of the charge under section 7(i) read with 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (hereinafter called "the Act".).

(2.) The complainant Nandkumar Mahadev Acharya visited the shop of the accused on 4-12-1972 at about 1.15 p.m. It was a grocery shop run under the name of M/s.Trilokchand Bhivraj Jain, the respondent-accused was the proprietor. 18 Kilos of Catechu was found kept in a tin with the words Kath painted on it. 600 gms. of Catechu came to be purchased for Rs. 18/- in the presence of the panchas. It was divided into three equal parts and placed in three polythene bags. The bags were sealed, one of it was given to the accused and his receipt was obtained. A panchanama was drawn up. One sample bag came to be sent to the Public Analyst and one bags was retained by the complainant. The report from the Public Analyst disclosed that the sample was adulterated under section 2(i)(e) of the Act. Upon getting the requisite sanction, the accused was prosecuted.

(3.) The evidence consisted of the Food Inspector panch Babulala Agarwal, another panch Manekchand Surajmal Jain and another Inspector Satishkumar Vishwanath, who accompanied Inspector Acharya. On the evidence before him, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused holding that the requirements of Rules 17 and 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules 1955 (hereinafter called the rules) were not fulfilled.

Click here to view full judgment.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. TRILOKCHAND BHIVRAJ JAIN

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address