STATE OF ORISSA Vs. V. SATYANARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State in this appeal has called in question the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bissam Cuttack in 2(c) C.C. No. 04 of 1995/T.R. No. 264 of 1995 acquitting the respondents of the charge under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (herein after called as the "Act")

(2.) Prosecution case is that on 11.03.1992 around 10.30 AM, the Food Inspector, Rayagadaand Gunupur P.W. 1, had been to the grocery shop of the respondent No. 2 with some vigilance staff of Rayagada division and his peon. He then found respondent No. 1 to be transacting the business in the said shop and found there the food articles, such as edible oil, varities of dal, besan, atta etc exposed for sale for human consumption. PW.1 then suspected besan kept in a gunny bag and chilly powder in the packets to be adulterated. So, he issued notice in Form No. VI to the respondent No. 1 expressing his intention in that regard. Then, he purchased 750 grams of besan and 600 grams of chilly powder (six packets, each of 100 grams) on payment of price. P.W.1 then divided the purchased besan into three equal parts and put them into three empty, clean and dry bottles. He corked, labelled those, wrapped by papers labels and affixed the paper slips. The purchased chilly powder packets were divided into three parts, each part containing two packets and those were tied together, labelled and wrapped by paper followed affixation of the paper slips. The signature of respondent No. 1 was taken on all those. It is further stated that the chilly powder packets were not labelled under the provision of Rule 32(c) and (f) of the P.F.A.Rules.

(3.) On 12.03.1992, the sample bottles containing besan and one part of the sample of chilly powder carrying two pockets were sent to the Public Analyst, Orissa, Bhubaneswar for analysis along with the memorandum containing the specimen impression of the seal used for sealing the samples. Also copies of memorandums containing specimen impression of the seal were sent separately. The samples were dispatched through the special messenger. On 04.08.1992, the P.W. 1 received the report of the Public Analyst. The Public Analyst found both the samples of besan and chilly powder to be adulterated. So, after local Health Authority (CDMO), Rayagada gave the written consent, the prosecution report was lodged on 21.02.1995 and that is how the respondents, faced the trial.