STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SAHAJI GAJANAN JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal against acquittal, arising out of prosecution under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter the Act), it is not necessary to deal with the various other grounds on which the acquittal, is based because the appeal can be disposed of on one out of these grounds.

(2.) The sample ice-cream was taken on 3rd March, 1982. One part thereof was sent to the Public Analyst on 4th March, 1982. The report of the Public Analyst was received by the Local Health Department on 21st April, 1982 i.e. after expiry of forty-five days. Under Rule 7 sub-Rule (3) of the Rules framed under the Act.

(3.) As we are confirming the acquittal on the aforesaid ground, it is not necessary to go into the other ground on which also the impugned acquittal is based.