STATE OF M.P. Vs. ADARSH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against acquittal. The accused respondents have been acquitted by the lower Appellate Court of charge punishable under section 7(1)/16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Aggrieved by this acquittal the State has come in appeal. The accused respondents carrying on business in sweet and Savoury. On 26.5.80 the Food Inspector Saxena P.W. I took a sample of NUKTI, which on analysis was found to be adulterated. The accused were prosecuted and found guilty by the trial Court. On appeal, however, they were acquitted by the lower Appellate Court. The short question raised by Shri Khan, learned G.A. in this appeal is whether on the basis of the report Ex. P. 8 submitted by the Public Analyst the accused respondents can be held guilty of the charge framed against them.

(2.) NUKTI a sweet was found to be adulterated inasmuch as it contained coaltar dye. The report reads as under :

(3.) Shri Brajesh Pandya, learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that merely stating base of coal tar dye was not enough for the Public Analyst. He ought to have given the nature of the dye, which the Public Analyst has failed to give. Rule 28 provides as follows - 'Food colour or a mixture thereof except the following shall be used in food. The prescribed food colours are mentioned in the Rule.