AMBATI VIJAY BHASKAR Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C') is filed by the revision petitioner herein challenging the judgment dated 01.02.2008, passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in Criminal Appeal No.224 of 2007, whereunder and whereby the conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') for offences under Section 2(ia)(m) of the Act vide the judgment dated 14.06.2007 in C.C.No.36 of 2006 by the I Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, is confirmed.

(2.) THE brief case of prosecution is that on 23.06.2004, the complainant -Food Inspector along with his attender inspected the shop of accused No.1 and purchased three Chanda Vanaspathi packets of 500 ml each under cash receipt for the price of Rs.93/ -. When the complainant questioned accused No.1 with regard to the purchase bills of the oil, he revealed that he purchased the same from an unknown purchaser of Proddatoor town without bill. Thereafter, the complainant served Form -VI notice -Ex.P3 on accused No.1 expressing his intention to send the sample for analysis and then taken three clean empty and dry corrugated boxes and placed each oil packet in each corrugated box, tied with twine and then he sealed them. The complainant also affixed a label bearing No.Z -IV/KDP/D1/1230/2004 on each of the samples with the aid of gum and wrapped each of the packets with a fairly thick brown paper, around each of the packets a paper slip having the seal and signature of the Local Health Authority around each of the sample pockets from top to bottom, and obtained the signatures of the accused No.1 and panch witnesses. After drafting the panchanama covering the above proceedings, he obtained the signature of accused No.1 and panch witnesses. On 24.06.2004, the complainant sent one of the samples along with Form VII to the Public Analyst by way of registered parcel in the postal service. Another copy of Form VII with specimen impression seal of the complainant was sent to the Public Analyst in a separate cover by way of registered post. On the same day, the complainant deposited the remaining two samples with Form VII memoranda with the Local Health Authority of Kadapa District under a covering letter dated 23.06.2004. The complainant has issued Form VI notice to accused No.1 for its business particulars. Accused No.3 has informed that accused No.2 is the nominee and responsible person to conduct the business on behalf of accused No.3 -company. On 02.08.2004, the complainant has received Public Analyst Report vide No.376 of 2004 through the Local Health Authority, Zone IV, Kadapa. In the said report, the Public Analyst opined that the sample of the food does not conform to the standards of Red Units in respect of sesame oil and it is therefore, adulterated. On 22.09.2004, the complainant has sent detailed report along with copies of the file to the Director, Food (Health), Authority, Hyderabad for sanction orders. The said Authority has accorded sanction in R.C.No.10624/F4/2004 dated 11.01.2005 to prosecute the accused for the offences under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act.

(3.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kamalapuram, Kadapa District, taken the case on file and transferred it to I Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, for disposal along with other cases. The learned I Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, took cognizance of the offence and framed a charge for the offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act against the accused. During trail, on behalf of prosecution, PW.1 was examined and Exs.P1 to P26 were got marked.