STATE HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. LOKI NAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State is directed against an order of acquittal recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Chamba vide which the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondent Loki Nand, of the offence under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, (hereinafter caned The Act).

(2.) The facts of this case show that a sample of mustard oil was purchased by the Food inspector from the respondent for purpose of analysis. This sample was purchased on 17th December, 1977. It was purchased and dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules framed there-under. The sample after its purchase was made into three parts and each part was sealed in a separate bottle. One part of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for purposes of analysis and the other two parts were sent to the Local (Health) Authority in term of Section 11 of the Act. The report of the Public Analyst showed that the sample was adulterated and hence the respondent was prosecuted.

(3.) The learned trial court acquitted the respondent on the short ground that the mandatory provisions of Section 13 (2) of the Act read with Rule 9-A of the Rule framed thereunder had not been complied with in this case, inasmuch as the Local (Health) Authority had never sent a copy of the report of the Public Analyst to the respondent nor informed the respondent of his right to get the other part of the sample kept by the Local (Health) Authority analysed from the Central Food Laboratory through Court. This noncompliance of the provisions of Section 13 (2) of the Act read with Rule 9-A, according to the learned Magistrate had vitiated the trial and entitled the respondent to acquittal.