BALESHWAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State as also the counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 in all the three applications, which involve identical questions for determination.

(2.) The present Cr. Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by the petitioner, praying for quashing the order of cognizance, passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar for the offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and also against the orders of the Sessions Judge, rejecting the Cr. Revision applications filed by him against the impunged orders of cognizance passed by the Magistrate.

(3.) Facts relevant for the disposal of these cases are as follows: