PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. KUPPAM SATYANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These seven Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgments of the Judicial First Class Magistrate of Proddatur, before whom prosecutions had been instituted under Section 20 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Central Act 37 of 1954), (which is hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of offences committed under Section 16(1) of the said Act, separately in each case.

(2.) I shall briefly state only such facts as are necessary for the disposal of this matter in the view I have taken which is indicated below. The various accused in these prosecutions are dealers in foodgrains and importers of the food commodity known as Agra Toor Dhall. The Sanitary Inspector of the Municipality (who is also designated as Food Inspector by G. O. No. 1621 dated 29-9-1956) purchased two annas worth of dhall in each, split them into three shares, put them in three separate bottles, sealed them, delivered one to the accused in each case, sent one to the Public Analyst for analysis purposes and sent one bottle to the Magistrates Court. The Public Analyst who carried out the analysis of the grain came to the conclusion that they contained artificial water soluble yellow coloring matter derived from coal tar and hence branded the sample as mis-branded food within the meaning of the Act. Hence the prosecutions.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the accused (Respondents) in these appeals, Mr. Adavt Rama Rao, raised a preliminary objection that the prosecutions in these cases had not been instituted by the competent authority i.e., the authority empowered to institute the proceedings under Section 20 of the Act. Section 20 of the Act is as follows : "(1) No prosecution for an offence under this Act shall be instituted except by, or with the written consent of, the State Government or a local authority or a person authorised in this behalf by the State Government or a local authority : Provided that a prosecution for an offence under this Act may be instituted by a purchaser referred to in Section 12, if he produces in court a copy of the report of the Public analyst along with the complaint. (2) No Court inferior to that of a Presidency Magistrate or a magistrate of the first class shall try any offence under this Act."