B.C.PATEL - (1.) : The State of Gujarat being aggrieved by the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur in summary case no.196 of 1987 on 27.3.1991, has preferred this appeal. The respondents nos.1 and 2 (original accused nos.1 and 2) were tried for an offence under sec.7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act ("the Act" for brevity) punishable under sec.16(1)(a)(i) of the Act.
(2.) Tusharbhai Dashrathbhai Bhatt, PW 1 collected a sample of peppermint as per the provisions contained in the Act and Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules ("the Rules" for brevity). The sample forwarded to the Public Analyst was found to be adulterated vide exh.30. After obtaining consent vide exh.31, the complaint came to be lodged vide exh.32. On appreciation of evidence, the trial court held that the accused are not guilty. Hence the appeal.
(3.) The trial court acquitted the accused on the following grounds : (1) (i) Sanction, exh.32 nowhere indicates that either there is a prima facie case made out against the accused or filing of the prosecution is in public interest. (ii) The prosecution has failed to establish as to how accused no.2 is concerned with business carried on in the name of "Milan Stores". Whether he is a partner or an owner was required to be established by the prosecution. The prosecution has not produced any evidence in this behalf. The prosecution could have produced a copy of licence issued under the Act or under other statutes, such as, Municipalities Act, the provisions contained under the Sales Tax Act, etc. (2) The trial court accepted the arguments advanced by the learned advocate on behalf of the accused that prosecution failed to forward "intimation" as contemplated under sec.13(2) of the Act. (3) The trial court accepted the contention that the evidence of Food Inspector is doubtful as Pancha, Kalidas Joitaram, PW 2 has not supported the prosecution and Rameshbhai Keshavbhai, Helper, PW 3, though serving with the complainant has stated that the procedure of sealing and labelling of the sample was carried out outside the shop while Panchnama was written in the shop.;