JYOTISH KUMAR SAHA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the written c o n s e n t of the Local (Health) Authority, Birbhum, Sri dhirendra Kumar Banerjee a Food inspector of Birbhum filed a complaint against the petitioner in the Court of the Chief Judicial magistrate, Birbhum under section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration act, 1954 ('act for short) alleging that on september 21, 1978 the petitioner exposed for sale mustard oil in his grocery shop, which on analysis was found to be adulterated. The learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month more. As the appeal preferred against the said conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Second Court, birbhum, the petitioner moved this Court in revision, and obtained the present Rule.

(2.) THE only point that has been urged in support of the Rule is that the provision of sub-section (2) of section 13 of the Act has not been properly complied with and due to such non-compliance the petitioner has been seriously prejudiced in his defence. For proper appreciation of the point so raised it will be necessary to refer to certain facts, which now stand established, by the concurrent findings of the courts below.

(3.) THE samples of mustard oil were taken on September 21, 1978 and were sent for analysis by the Food Inspector on september 22, 1978. On analysis the public Analyst found the same adulterated and sent his report to the Local (Health)Authority, Birbhum on October 30, 1978 ; and the latter in his turn sent the report to the Food Inspector on November 27, 1978. On the basis thereof, the Food Inspector filed the complaint before the learned Chief judicial Magistrate on 7. 12 1978, with the requisite consent of the Local (Health)Authority. On the same day the Local (Health) Authority sent a report of the public Analyst to the petitioner by registered post; and by the forwarding memo informed the petitioner that if it was so desired he might make an application to the Chief judicial Magistrate, Suri within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the report to get the sample of the mustard oil kept by the Authority analysed by the Central Food Laboratory. The report was received by the petitioner on 13. 12. 78. Though the complaint was received by the learned Magistrate on 7, 12. 78 he took cognisance upon the complaint on December 29, 1978 and issued process against the petitioner.