STATE Vs. SELVOM ATHISAVEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Ferreira, learned Public Prosecutor for the appellant and Mr. J.J. Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25th August, 2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, "C" Court, Mapusa in OA Criminal Case No.1532/S/2004/F/C.

(3.) MR. Ferreira, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the outset, submitted that the learned Magistrate has not even put to the accused the ingredients of the offence of misbranding nor while passing the impugned order, this aspect of the matter has been considered by the learned Magistrate. Mr. Ferreira submitted that since the complaint was filed alleging misbranding by the accused, the Magistrate ought to have put the necessary ingredients of misbranding to the accused while explaining the substance of accusation and ought to have dealt with the same while passing the judgment. He further invited my attention to the fact that the complainant and the Public Analyst in their evidence, have clearly deposed about misbranding of substance which was purchased by the complainant on 07.06.2004. He, therefore, submitted that it would be just and proper to set aside the impugned judgment and order and remand the matter to the Magistrate to dispose of the matter after explaining the substance of accusation to the accused. He further invited my attention to the fact that recording of statement under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code is sketchy and, therefore, the Magistrate be also directed to put to the accused all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them. He further submitted that in terms of Rule 22 since the roasted peanuts were in packed condition, there was no question of dividing the substance into three samples and in terms of Rule 22, it is permissible for the Food Inspector to send the food sold as it stood for analysis. Mr. Ferreira fairly conceded that in terms of Rule 28 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rule, 1955, it is permissible to use the colour sunset yellow FCF and, therefore, addition of said colour to roasted peanuts does not amount to adulteration under the Act.