GANDHARV LAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, hereinafter shortly stated 'the Code', the petitioner prays for quashing his prosecution under Section 16 (1) (a) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', as ordered by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Ghum-arwin vide his order dated 21-9-1979 whereby the Judicial Magistrate discharged Shri Bal Kishan (vendor) against whom the original complaint under Section 16 (1) (a) of the Act had been filed by the Food Inspector and on an application made by the said Shri Bal Kishan, directed prosecution of the present petitioner for the offence aforesaid.

(2.) IT appears that on 28-11-1978 the Food Inspector, Bilaspur purchased a sample of Meethi Golian from Shri Bal Kishan of village Dakari, Tehsil Ghum-arwin, for the purpose of analysis under the Act. The said sample, according to the allegations made in the complaint lodged by the Food Inspector against the said Shri Bal Kishan, was taken and dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and on being analysed by the Public Analyst it was found adulterated. The Food Inspector accordingly filed a complaint against the said Shri Ba] Kishan under Section 16 (1) (a) read with Section 7 of the Act.

(3.) THE Magistrate, on the complaint being presented to him, proceeded forthwith to summon Shri Bal Kishan vendor and after Shri Bal Kishan put in appearance before him the learned Magistrate adjourned the case for prosecution evidence. On the date fixed for prosecution evidence, however, no such evidence was recorded but on the other hand Shri Bal Kishan vendor moved an application purporting to be under Sections 14, 19 and 20-A of the Act before the Magistrate praying that he be discharged and in his place the present petitioner be impleaded as accused. Shri Bal Kishan vendor had alleged in his application aforesaid that he had purchased Meethi Golian out of which the sample had been taken by the Food Inspector from the manufacturer, the present petitioner, through M/s. Munshi Ram Bimal Parkash, the agents of the manufacturer, under a warrant and while in his possession such Meethi Golian had been properly stored and he had sold them in the same state as he had purchased.