MUNICIPAL COUNCIL MORENA Vs. MADANLAL VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After obtaining the requisite leave, the appellant, Municipal Council, Morena, has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal of the respondent recorded by Shri R.S. Maurya, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morena in Criminal Case No. 2524 of 1981 dated 20-5-1982.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that in Morena town there is a shop of sweetmeat named Bihari Misthan Bhandar, which carries on the business of preparing and selling sweetmeats. On 13-8-1981 Food Inspector P. W. Narwariya (P.W. 1) visited this shop of the respondent, disclosed his identity that he was Food Inspector and inspected the licence issued to the respondent for the year 1981-82. The shop was being attended by the, respondent at that time. The Food Inspector P.D. Narwariya wanted to take the sample of 'Boondi Ka Laddu' and, hence, issued a notice in form No. 9 (Ext. P1). This notice (Ext. P- 1) was signed by him. It is alleged that the respondent refused to accept the notice, closed his shop and left the place. Thus, he prevented P.D. Narwariya, Food Inspector, from taking the sample from his shop. This act, according to the prosecution, is punishable under S.16(1)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, hereinafter called 'the Act'). Upon this, P.D. Narwariya, Food Inspector, prepared a memo (Ext. P-2) writing all the details therein and signed it. The respondent did not sign this memo. This document, the Panchayatnama(Ext. P-2) was witnessed by Srikrishna (P.W. 2) and Nathikhan (P.W. 3). The notice (Ext. Pl ) was not only signed by P.D. Narwariya but also sealed by him, which indicates that he was the Food Inspector, and he wanted to take the sample of 'Boondi Ka Laddu' for being analysed by the Public Analyst, which was professed to have been prepared by means of pure 'deshi ghee'. The 'Panchanama' (Ext. P-2) was signed and sealed by Narwariya, the Food Inspector, and witnessed by Nathi Khan and Srikrishna. Similarly, when the respondent refused to accept the notice (Ext. P-1), the fact of refusal was endorsed on the back, and Nathi Khan and Srikrishna signed it.

(3.) During the trial, P. W. Narwariya, Food Inspector was examined as P.W. 1 and he was cross-examined by the respondent. Nothing was brought out in the cross-examination to show that P.D. Narwariya, Food inspector, had a motive to falsely implicate the respondent in this case. Srikrishna (P.W. 2) who is a carpenter by profession, stated at the trial that when the sample of 'Boondi Ka Laddu' was demanded by the Food Inspector from the respondent, the respondent refused to give, and he also refused to accept the notice (Ext. P-1). He admits signing Ext. P-1 as well as the Panchanama (Ext. P-2). He admits in cross-examination that he lives in the Mohalla where the Food Inspector resides. Natthi Khan (P.W. 3) corroborates fully the testimony of P.D. Narwariya as well as Srikrishna.