(1.) THE petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C.has assailed summoning order dated 27.04.2011 and has also prayed for quashing of complaint case No. 35/3 of 2011 'State V. Satpal ' under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954(for short Act), pending before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kasauli.
(2.) THE facts as alleged in the petition are that petitioner is running business of sale and purchase of various food 3s including products of 'M/s Hindustan Unilever Limited ' at his premises run under the name and style of 'M/s Nav Durga Traders, Parwanoo '. The 'Kwality Walls Frozen Dessert ' in different flavours is manufactured and marketed by 'M/s Hindustan Unilever Limited '. On 19.10.2010 a sample of 'Kwality Walls Frozen Dessert ' (Vanilla flavour) was taken by Food Inspector from the petitioner from his premises for analysis under the Act. The Food Inspector strangely instead of correctly describing the sample as 'Kwality Walls Frozen Dessert ' described the same as 'Kwality Walls Ice Cream '. The Public Analyst in his report described the sample as Amul ' (Ice Cream Kwality Walls). It is not clear from where the Public Analyst has borrowed the name 'Amul '. It appears the Public Analyst has tested some other sample and not the sample taken by Food Inspector from the petitioner.
(3.) THE petitioner apprehending that the Public Analyst may test the sample as Ice Cream, made a representation to the Chief Medical Officer/Local Health Authority with a request that the Public Analyst may be directed to treat the sample as that of Frozen Dessert and test the same as such. The petitioner waited for some time for the reply of Chief Medical Officer, the petitioner moved an application on 19.03.2011 under the Right to Information Act,2005, to know the fate of his representation. The petitioner received the reply dated 19.04.2011 from the Chief Medical Officer to the effect that the Public Analyst concerned has been directed to test the sample as Frozen Dessert.