MILK FOOD LTD Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By making this revision petition, the petitioners, who are accused in CR Case No. 309c/2000, presently pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati, have sought for quashing of the complaint, which has given rise to the said Complaint Case.

(2.) I have heard Mr. O.P. Bhati, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners and Mr. P. Borah, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam.

(3.) The material facts and various stages, which have given rise to the present revision, may, in a nutshell, be set out as follows On 7.7.99, a Food Inspector collected sample of Ghee, sold under the brand name of'Milk Food', from the shop premises of the accused-petitioner No. 1. In course of time, the Public Analyst submitted his report, wherein the Public Analyst opined that the sample of Ghee is misbranded as per Rule 32(e) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (in short, 'the PFA Rules'). Based on the report of the Public Analyst and having received sanction for prosecution, the Food Inspector lodged a complaint for prosecution of the accused-petitioners herein under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short, "the PFA Act'). Since the petitioner No. 1, as vendor, and the petitioner No. 2, as manufacturer, of the Ghee, sold under the brand name of Milk Food', faced prosecution for selling and storing for sale, the mis- branded Ghee, they have challenged their prosecution in the present revision.