MAHAVIR LOHIYA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.by A-3 in S.T.C.No.10 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate,Kothavalasa, Vizianagaram District.

(2.) The Food Inspector, Vizianagaram filed a compliant against the petitioner and others under Sections 16 (1) (1) (i) and 7 (i) 2 (ia) (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for allegedly adulterating Vanaspati manufactured by A-4 Company. The Food Inspector inspected the shop of A-1 known as Srinivasa Kriana and General Stores, Kothavalasa, on 29-06-2001. At that time, A-1 was found transacting the business. He exhibited edible oils, spices, dhalls and gold drop vanaspati sealed packets for sale. The Vanaspati sealed packets contained 200 ml Vanaspati manufactured by A-4 Company. The Food Inspector checked the Vanaspati packets in the presence of A-1 and suspected that they were adulterated. Therefore, he purchased six packets by paying the price to A-1 under a receipt. After service of notice in Form-VI to A-1, the Food Inspector sent the samples to the concerned authorities after following the procedure prescribed under the Rules. On ascertaining, A-1 disclosed that the said packets were supplied by A-2 manufactured by A-4 Company and produced the bill proof of purchase from the Distributors. On 30-06-2001, the Food Inspector sent one sample to the Public Analyst, A.P., Hyderabad, for analysis On 08-08-2001, the Local (Heath) Authority received a report from the Public Analyst and on 27-08-2001,the Food Inspector received Form-Ill report in triplicate form the Local (Health) Authority, Kothavalasa Gram Panchayat. The Public Analyst opined that the same does not conform to red units in respect of Sesama Oil and therefore, adulterated. The Food Inspector received written consent from the Director of Food and Health, A.P., Hyderabad, therefore, he filed a complaint to prosecute all the accused. After receipt of notice, the petitioner approached this Court to quash the prosecution against him in the above case.

(3.) The petitioner contended that there is no allegation in the complaint that he is involved in the commission of offence or is concerned with the affairs of A-4 Company. The petitioner resigned from the Directorship of A-4 Company on 28-05-2001 and the same was recorded by the Registrar of companies and sent a communication to that effect. The petitioner is no way concerned with A-4 Company in any manner. There is no mention in the complaint as to how the petitioner is connected with affairs of the company as on the date taking sample i.e., 29-06-2001.