SHYAMALNAG Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. JM Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. And also heard Mr. P. Bora, learned PP, Assam.

(2.) The only point involved in this criminal revision preferred by the petitioner against his impugned conviction under section 16 (1) (a) read with section 7 (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, the Act) and sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default further imprisonment for one month, is that the legal requirement as envisaged under section 13 (2) of the Act has not been complied with in the instant case.

(3.) Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the findings of the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon recorded in his judgment dated 8.3.96 passed in Criminal Appeal No.51 (N) of 1995, Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel has contended that when Food Inspector himself did not depose about the serving of notice on the petitioner in terms of section 13 (2) of the Act, the learned Sessions Judge ought to have declared that the prosecution against the petitioner was vitiated for non-compliance of the said statutory provi sion.