ARUN CHANDRA GHOSH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal petition is directed against the judgment & order dated 28.03.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat, in Criminal Appeal No. 13/2008. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment & order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Golaghat, in C.R. Case No. 04/2004, whereby the petitioner was convicted u/s. 7/16 (1-A) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year and fine of Rs. 2,000/-, with default stipulation.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, is that, one Sri P. Banikya, Food Inspector, visited the business establishment of the petitioner, under the name and style "M/s Ghosh Diary", on 09.08.2004, and purchased 3 (three) packets of Sweet Supari of Rakhi Brand for the purpose of taking sample. The said Sweet Supari containing 250 grams in each packets, were packed and sealed as per the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'PFA Act') , and Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'PFA Rules') and 1 (one) sample was sent to the Public Analyst for examination and the remaining the 2 (two) samples were sent to the local Health Authority. The Public Analyst, after examination of the same, submitted report, stating that the sample of the Sweet Supari, a Pan Masala; was adulterated, as it contained synthetic colour which was not permitted to be used. Upon receiving such report, the Food Inspector lodged a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Golaghat, and eventually, the present petitioner stood trial for offence u/s. 7/16 (1-A) (i) of the PFA Act.

(3.) In course of trial, the prosecution examined 2 (two) witnesses, and the petitioner also examined 1 (one) witness as DW-1. On appreciation of the evidence, the learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner and awarded sentence; as indicated above.