MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, KHANDWA Vs. GANPATLAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Abdul Rahman (P.W. 1) who was empowered as a food-inspector on 9-1-1976 took 660 milliliters milk from the shop of respondent No. 1 and paid its price to his servant Narain. The food-inspector distributed that milk in three clean dry bottles in equal quantity and after adding formalin in each one of them sealed them as per the rules. After putting tire necessary labels one of the bottles was given to Narain. According to the report Ex. P-9 of the Public Analyst the milk was found to be adulterated which does not conform to the standards. After the necessary formalities a complaint was filed against respondent No. 1 who is the owner of the shop from which the milk was taken and against Narain who was the servant. However, Narain was found to be absconding and did not appear during the trial.

(2.) The Chief Judicial Magistrate accepting the evidence of Abdul Rahman (PW 1) and Dilawar Hussain (PW 4) found that the milk had been taken from the shop belonging to respondent Ganpat. He, therefore, finding the respondent guilty under Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, sentenced him to a sentence of rising of the Court and to a fine of Rs. 1000.00 in default 10 months' rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) Learned Additional Sessions Judge also relying on the evidence of Abdul Rahman (PW 1) and Dilawar Hussain (PW 4) found that Narain was the employee of respondent No. 1. He, however, acquitted the accused only on the ground that since there was a delay in filing the complaint, the accused has been deprived of his right under Sec. 13 (2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and thus, has been prejudiced. Accordingly, he allowed the appeal and set-aside the conviction and sentence as was awarded to the respondent by the trial Magistrate.