BHANWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer, dated 23 -3 -1979, by which he framed a charge under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 against the accused.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the Food Inspector visited the shop of the accused in village Kalyanpur and found Taramira oil in a tin there. Suspecting the oil to be adulterated, he took the sample and prepared the Memo Ex. P. 3. In the memo the signatures of the accused were taken. Above the signatures the accused wrote that the Taramira oil was not meant for human consumption but was meant for cattle consumption. Mr. Singhvi, learned counsel for the accused further submitted that the accused has also mentioned in Ex. P. 3 that the oil was 'Tel Jamba' and as such no offence was committed by the accused.

(3.) NOW whether the oil seeds is not meant for human consumption or that it was meant for cattle consumption or that it was not Taramira oil and that it, was only 'Tel Jamba' are essentially the questions of fact. It is open to the accused to raise all these questions during the trial before the learned Magistrate It is still open to the learned Magistrate to decide all these questions of fact. At this stage no interference is called for. Only a charge has been framed against the accused. The accused has ample opportunity to meet the charge.