L M BATRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner at the relevant time was the General Manager of Hotel Ashoka, Ranchi, One Surendra Kumar, Food Inspector, visited the hotel on 21 1 1990 and purchased turmaric powder from the Store in charge for analysis. The sample on being analysed by the Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi, was found to be adulterated. It contained Lead Chromate which is injurious to health. The Food Inspector filed a prosecution report in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi no 5 4 1991 for taking cognizance under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. A copy of the analysis report was forwarded to the petitioner for necessary action. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance by order, dated 19 12 1991. The prosecution report was filed after sanction was accorded by the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi.

(2.) THE petitioner has impugned the legality of the prosecution and cognizance on several grounds. First ground is that the turmeric was not sold by the petitioner who was the General Manager, but by the Stores in charge. The second ground is that the turmeric was meant for internal consumption of the hotel and not meant for sale. The third ground is that the sanctioning authority has not applied his mind before according sanction. The last ground is that the petitioner was not given option to get the sample analysed by the Central Food Laboratory as provided under Section 13(3) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(3.) THE Supreme Court in The Food Inspector, Calicut Corporation v. Cherukattil Gopalan and Anr. : 1971CriLJ1277 , following the decision in Mangaldas Raghavji Ruparet v. State of Maharashtra : 1971CriLJ1277 , held that sale of sample of a food article to Food Inspector amount to a sale as defined in Section 2(xiii).