FOOD INSPECTOR Vs. PADAKANTI BHUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is filed as against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 1997 on the file of the Sessions Judge Karimnagar, whereunderthe Appellate court had reversed the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused in Calendar Case No. 245 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Siricilla.

(2.) The learned Additional public Prosecutor pointed out that the evidence of P.W. 1 would disclose that he made an attempt to secure a panch witness, but since the said person was not inclined and refused to disclose his name and went away, it cannot be said that there is non-compliance of Section 10(7) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (For brevity the Act). He would also submit that the learned Judge arrived at a correct conclusion that the report of the Public Analyst is admissible in evidence in proof of the facts stated therein apart from the result of the analysis without production of the Analyst as a witness. He would further contend that the other two grounds on which acquittal had been recorded, thatthe contents of the Public Analyst Report had not been specifically put to the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. examination and also there was no stirring before taking of samples cannot be sustained. He would also contend that the evidence of Food Inspector is sufficient and hence in the facts and circumstances of the case, the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 1997 may have to be set aside and the judgment in C.C. No. 245 of 1995 may have to be restored.

(3.) Per contra, Sri Satyanarayana Ambadipudi appointed by this Court to assist the Court as amicus curiae, had taken this Court through the findings recorded by the Appellate Court and would submit that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the acquittal may have to be confirmed.