THE STATE Vs. ANANDJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in the present case was prosecuted for the offence under section 16(l)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), for preventing the Food Inspector from taking sample of Besan, an article of food.

(2.) According to the prosecution version, on the 7th Jan., 1976, the Food Inspector Patil (P.W. 1) along with another Food Inspector and a Drug Inspector Deshpande (P.W. 3) and two independent witnesses, including Parera (P.W. 2) had visited the shop of the accused at Vikhroli. They found that the shop was facing West and on the left hand side adjoining the northern wall there was a cup-board kept east-west in the shop. The gap between the wall and the said cup-board admeasured 1 to 11/2 and it is in this gap that a tin containing 1 kg. of Besan was kept. This Besan contained larvae and other insects. Patil demanded sample of besan as well as other four articles with which we are not concerned. The accused gave sample of the other articles. However, he refused to give sample of Besan. Patil, however, wanted to take sample of Besan as well, but the accused prevented him from doing so by throwing the sample on the road and thereafter pouring water on it. He thus destroyed the said Besan and thereby prevented the complainant from taking sample of the said article. Hence the prosecution.

(3.) The learned Magistrate accepted the defence version that Besan was not kept for sale and that the Food Inspector was authorised to take sample only of article meant for sale. He, therefore, held that there was no offence committed by the accused and hence acquitted him of the said offence, It is this order of acquittal which is being challenged by the State in this appeal.