STATE Vs. BABU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint under Section 7(i) read with Section 16(1) Clause (a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') was filed by Food Inspector, Union Territory, Chandigarh, against accused-respondent Babu Singh, milk vendor, on the averments that on 19.10.2000 at about 08:30 am, the accused-respondent was in possession of 40 litres of buffalo milk meant for public sale and the Food Inspector, who has been notified so and appointed vide Chd. Admn. Gazette Notification No. 2828-UTFI (2)-AH-97/13667 dated 08.10.1997, after necessary formalities had drawn the sample as per rules after filling Form No. VI, in the presence of independent witnesses and in due course sample was sent to the public analyst and was found to be deficient in milk fat by 13% and in milk solids not fat by 31% of the minimum prescribed standard for buffalo milk, leading to the filing of the complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, on 31.01.2009. It was after the accused was served charge sheet to which he had pleaded not guilty and during the course of trial, an application was moved on 17.09.2003 for discharge of the accused on the grounds that the Food Inspector, who had drawn the sample had not undergone the requisite training and therefore the prosecution was invalid and sought dismissal of the complaint. The application was opposed by the State contending that the application was mala fide as the Food Inspector had undergone proper training and no prejudice has been caused to the accused-respondent and there was no legal infirmity in the appointment of Food Inspector or in the drawing of the samples. The Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, through impugned order dated 24.05.2004 allowed this application and thereby discharged the accused and which finding has been impugned in the Criminal Revision No. 767 of 2005 by the State on the strength of the contentions detailed in the revision petition.

(2.) It was subsequent during the hearing of the criminal revision, the learned Single Bench through order dated 12.04.2013 has referred the matter for decision by larger Bench in the light of important questions of law arising in the revision petition which have been enumerated as follows:

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.