NIRANJAN BEHERA Vs. SATYANARAYAN MAHASWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal arises out of a judgement of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Ganjam acquitting the respondent of an offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

(2.) APPELLANT is the Food Inspector of the Berhampur Municipality. On 13 -1 -76 he visited the shop of the respondent for inspection of food articles exposed for sale for human consumption. After observing the formalities he purchased 1500 grams of Vanaspati as sample from a closed and sealed tin and paid Rs. 12.72 paise towards its price. He divided the sample into three equal parts and placed them in three clean and dry bottles and sealed and labelled them. One bottle containing the sample was sent to the Public Analyst and the other two bottles were handed over to the local Health authority as required by law. The Public Analyst of the Government of Orissa opined that the sample in question was adulterated. After obtaining necessary sanction under Section 20 of the Act, the appellant filed prosecution report against the respondent.

(3.) THE trial court held that the respondent had purchased the Vanaspati from M/s. Santosh Trading and Co. under the credit bill - Ext. A - and sold it in the same state as he purchased. Accordingly it held that the respondent was protected under Section 19(2)(a)(ii) of the Act and acquitted him of the charge.