RISHI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by Rishi Kumar against the judgment and order dated December, 5, 1984, of Shri N.S. Bhatia, Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, dismissing Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 1984 and maintaining the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fazilka, under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short, the Act).

(2.) ON September 24, 1980 Dr. Vinod Kumar Behl, the Government Food Inspector purchased 450 gms. of red crushed chilies the petitioner for analysis and after completing the formalities, sent one of the samples to the Public Analyst who vide his report Ex. PE found the same to the adulterated as it contained an oil soluble coaltar dye of red shade whereas chilies (Lal Mirch) should be free from any added colouring matter. The petitioner made an application under Section 13(2) of the Act and a sample was sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Ghaziabad, who gave his opinion vide report Ex. PH that it was adulterated. The Food Inspector filed a complaint against the petitioner in which he was convicted as aforesaid.

(3.) IT is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no doubt that the Public Analyst as well as the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Ghaziabad have found the samples to be adulterated but on different dates. It is contended by the learned counsel that the report of the Director, Central Food Laboratory, had surpassed the report of the Public Analyst and this report had to be put to the petitioner under Section 313, CrPC but it was not so put. There appears to be substance in his contention. The omission to put the Director's report to the petitioner under Section 313 CrPC was an omission of far reaching consequence because very important evidence against the petitioner on which he was going to be convicted, was not put to him and he was not allowed an opportunity of explaining this evidence. Since this report was not put to the petitioner under Section 313, CrPC, the conviction of the petitioner cannot be upheld.