STATE OF M P Vs. UMA SHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the State/appellant against the the judgment of acquittal passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morena in Criminal Case no. 118/95 dated 9/3/1999, by which the respondent was acquitted against the charge under section 7 (1) and 16 (1) (a) of the Prevention of Food adulteration Act.

(2.) IN short the story of the prosecution is that on 28. 4. 1994 Food inspector visited the shop of respondent and purchased sample of 'khoa'. It was divided into three parts and one part was sent for Public Analyst. As per the report received from the Public Analyst, the sample was found adulterated. After sanction for prosecution, charge sheet was filed before the Court and the Court framed the charge against the respondent and after perusal of prosecution evidence he was acquitted by the trial Court. The trial Court acquitted the respondent on the ground that Rule 17 and 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was not complied with.

(3.) THE finding of acquittal is challenged on the ground that the trial court has wrongly held that Rule 17 and 18 were not complied with. The trial Court has not given any cogent reason. The article was sent for examination to Central Food laboratory and the report indicate that the seized article of food was adulterated.