JATINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint was filed by Dr. Randhir Singh, Medical Officer, Rural Dispensary, Rayya, District Amritsar, against the petitioner, Under Section 16 (1) (a) (i), read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the following allegations. The petitioner is a partner in Quality Restaurant, Lawrence Road Amritsar. On Jan. 15, 1977, the complainant visited the said Restaurant and found in possession of the petitioner two killograms of white sauce in a tin which was meant for public sale. It is alleged that he disclosed to the petitioner that he was a Food Inspector and authorised to seize the samples of the food stuffs from him. He served a notice upon the petitioner disclosing his intention to take the sample of white sauce from him. He paid an amount of Rs. 7. 50 to the petitioner and purchased from him 600 grams of white sauce. He divided the sauce into three separate parts and put them in three dry and clean bottles and added formaline to the sauce in each bottle. The bottles were thereafter sealed. One bottle was kept by the Food Inspector, the second was given to the petitioner and the third was given to the Medical Officer of Health, as contemplated Under Section 11 of the Act. The Food Inspector sent his sample to the Public Analyst, Punjab, Chandigarh. After the receipt of the report from the Public Analyst, a complainf was filed by the Food Inspector in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Court, after recording preliminary evidence, charge-sheeted the petitioner Under Section 16 (1) (a) (i), read with Section 7 of the Act vide order dated Sept. 14, 1977. This petition has been had Under Section 482/401, Cr. PC for quashing the complaint and the order dated Sept. 14, 1977.

(2.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the quantity of sauce, which was sent to the Public Analyst, was 200 grams, whereas it should have been 300 grams under the provisions of Rule 22 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). In support of his contention, he made a reference to item No. 18 of Rule 22 of the Rules, wherein quantity of various articles of food, which are required to be taken by the Inspector for sending to Public Analyst have been given,

(3.) I have considered the argument of the learned counsel and find force in it. The word 'sauce' has been defined in Rule A 16. 12 of Appendix 'b' annexed to the Rules, as follows : A. 16. 12, 'sauce' hall be the product derived from any suitable kind and variety of fruit and vegetable which are wholesome and which shall be practically free from insect or fungal attack or blemish affecting the quality of the fruit or vegetable-The only substances that may be added are fruits, vegetable, their pulp, juice, dried fruit, sugar, spices, salt, vinegar, acetic acid, citric acid, malic acid, onion, garlic, flavouring material and permitted preservatives. It shall not contain any coaltar dye. . . .