LAWS(P&H)-1997-7-141

PREM RATTAN WADHWA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On July 22, 1997
Prem Rattan Wadhwa Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PREM Rattan Wadhwa petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the quashment of the proceedings pending against him under Section 7 read with section 17(1)(i)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) IT has been pleaded by the petitioner that on 21.2.1986 at about 6.15 P.M. the shop of the petitioner was inspected in village Mahespur by Sh. S.P. Mali, Govt. Food Inspector, Kalka and it was noticed that the petitioner had kept in his possession 7 gunny bags each having 90 kgs. wheat atta for public sale. After serving notice Ex. PA, the Food Inspector purchased 600 gms. of the said wheat atta against payment of Rs. 1.20 vide receipt Ex.PD. The sample of the atta was got analysed from the Public Analyst and it was found to be adulterated as the sample contained total ash 2.36% and ash insoluble in dilute HCl 1.02% against the maximum prescribed standards of 2.0% and 0.15% respectively and grit 0.9% and taste was also found gritty.

(3.) NOTICE of the petition was given to respondents. Dr. S.K. Gupta, Civil Surgeon, Ambala has filed written statement on behalf of the respondent. According to the respondents before framing charge statement of Sh. S.P. Malik, Food Inspector, Kalka was recorded on 20.2.1987 by the learned CJM, Ambala. According to the respondents there is no delay on the part of the prosecution to launch the prosecution and the trial of the case is in progress and no harassment has been caused to the petitioner. The petitioner has got tested the second sample from the Central Food Laboratory and the result of the same has been received by the learned CJM, Ambala. The sample has been found sub-standard and minor and negligible discrepancy in percentage of the contents of ash, ash insoluble and grit cannot be ignored and in this regard reliance has been placed by the respondents on FAC 1976 II page 44. With the above defence, the respondents have prayed for the dismissal of the petition.