STATE OF HARYANA Vs. CHAJU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has filed his appeal against the judgment dated January 02, 1991 vide which respondent-Chaju Ram was acquitted of the charges framed against him.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on November 12, 1986, Food Inspector visited the shop of respondent and found him in possession of 7 packets of Namkeen Bhujia which were meant for public sale. The Food Inspector purchased 900 grams of Namkeen Bhujia against payment. He divided the same into three parts. It was put in three bottles which were labelled and sealed as per the rules. After completing the formalities, he sent one sealed bottle of sample to Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh along with Form No. VII while the other two samples were handed over to Local Health Authority on that very date. On receipt of report of the Public Analyst, it was found that the sample was coloured with unpermitted matanil yellow coaltar dye. Then a complaint was filed against the respondent and he was asked to stand trial for contravention of the provisions of Section 7 read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, the Act). On March 4, 1987, trial Court passed the following order :-

(3.) MR . G.P.S. Nagra, learned Assistant Advocate General appearing for the State has vehemently contended that the trial Court, while passing the order under challenge, has failed to appreciate the provisions of Section 16-A of the Act, empowering the trial Court in commencing the trial as a warrant case. In that regard, he also referred to the order dated March 04, 1987, wherein even respondent desired that the case be tried as a warrant case. Shri Nagra, thus, contended that the trial Court by passing the impugned judgment had failed to notice the order passed earlier on March 04, 1987. He prayed that the appeal be allowed.