D.S. SHRIVASTAVA Vs. UDELAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal against respondent's acquittal u/s 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 recorded in Criminal Case No. 3548/85 of the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balaghat is based on the ground that copy of the report received from the public Analyst was sent to the respondent by a registered post A.D. and, therefore, a presumption can be drawn u/s 114 of the Evidence Act that the same did reach him. Unfortunately the learned counsel for the appellant could not show from the record that the postal receipt of one part of the sample having thus been sent was produced during trial. What was produced was the despatch register showing the despatch of such a communication. Obviously, from an entry in the register it cannot be presumed that the cover was in fact presented at the counter of the post office. Had the document been really sent through registered post A.D. there would have been no difficulty for the complainant to have produced the post receipt and acknowledgement of the respondent. Thus, we see that not only the acknowledgement was not produced even the postal receipt of transmission was not produced. In such circumstances, the acquittal was a foregone conclusion.

(2.) IN result this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.