SANKA RAVI GOPAL Vs. STATE OF A.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M/s. Cadbury India Private Limited along with its officers who are arrayed as A1 to A4 in C.C.No. 429 of 2009 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada seeks for quashment of the charge sheet. The Food Inspector who inspected the shop of the 1st respondent on 25-05-2007, purchased Cadbury 5 Star Chocolates from the 1st petitioner. The sample was sent for analysis. The Public Analyst issued opinion on 07-07-2007 that the sample contained vegetable oil and also contained Benzoic Acid, which was not declared on the label. The Public Analyst opined that the sample was both adulterated and misbranded. On the basis of the report of the Analyst, a case was booked against the four petitioners.

(2.) Sri M.S. Srinivasa Iyengar, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused contended that in view of Appendix-B Clause A.25.03 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 ('the PFA Rules' for short) and in view of Rule 32 (b) read with proviso after Rule 32 (f) of the PFA Rules, the petitioners are not guilty of committing the offences under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Sections 7(i)(ii) and (2)(ia)(m) of the provisions of the PFA Act 1954.

(3.) Smt Zareena Afsar, learned counsel representing the Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the samples were indeed adulterated as can be seen from the report of the Analyst and that it automatically is tantamount to injuries to health, so much so the offences are made out against the accused.