INDIAN SWEETS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are satisfied that the Revision must succeed and the,impugned order must be set aside and the accused-petitioners shall have to be discharged. The reason that has very strongly weighed with us in coming to this decision is hereunder.

(2.) THE sample of Dahi was taken on 6-7-79, but the prosecution was launched only on 23-9-81 and the notice notifying that the sample Dahi was found to be adulterated by the Public Analyst could be served on the pettioners on 23-11-81. The petitioners endeawored to exercise their right under Section 13 (2) of prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 even at that belated stage and the other sample was accordingly sent to the Director, Central Food laboratory, but the later reported back that the sample was no longer in a condition fit for analysis.

(3.) IT is common knowledge that Milk Product like Dahi undergoes changes very soon and decomposition starts, even when preservatives are added and precautionary steps are taken, if there is inordinate delay between the taking of the sample and its analysis. in the Supreme Court Case of Municipal corporation vs. Ghisa Ram (AIR 1967 SC 970), there was similar delay of about 2 years and the Director, Central Food Laboratory, found the sample to the unfit for analysis. The Supreme Court ruled that the accused was deprived of his valuable right of having the sample analyzed by the Director under Section 13 (2) of the Act and was accordingly prejudiced in his defence and that his acquittal was justified.