NARAYANDAS HOTCHAND CHANDWANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-1978-11-7
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (FROM: NAGPUR)
Decided on November 22,1978

NARAYANDAS HOTCHAND CHANDWANI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

LAXMANDAS SARVOTTAMDAS V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MADAN MOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR A P VS. MURLIDHAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. JESSU DOSA [REFERRED TO]
BHOLA NATH NAYEK VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

KAMBLI, J. - (1.)The applicant accused has been convicted for an offence punishable under section 7(i) read with section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appeal preferred by him to the Sessions Judge, Nagpur, has been dismissed. Being aggrieved the applicant has preferred this revision application.
(2.)The prosecution case to state briefly was that on 21-6-1974 Food Inspector Ammorikar (P.W. 1) had gone to the shop by name "M/s. Gwalani Brothers". He found that the partner of the shop was present in the shop. He purchased 300 grams. of Chandu Tofees for sample from the shop. The partner who was sitting in the shop disclosed that the tofee was manufactured by Shakti Food Products, Nagpur run by the present applicant accused. Therefore, the Food Inspector on 14-8-1974 went to this factory of the accused along with P.S.I. Patil and two Panchas. P.S.I. Patil disclosed the identity to the applicant accused. Then he took search of the shop of the accused. They seized the sweets in that factory along with certain labels and articles. Seizure memo was prepared by P.S.I. Patil as per Ex. 22. Panchanama as per Exh. 23 was also drawn. It was signed by P.S.I. Patil, Food Inspector and the Panchas.
(3.)The case of the prosecution is that thereafter the Food Inspector took samples out of the coco-burfee and Chandu burfee sized by P.S.I. Patil. According to the prosecution, Food Inspector demanded 1500 grams of burfee labelled as Chandu Products, Bombay, and 375 grams of coco burfee from the accused and paid the price therefore. These samples were ultimately sent to the Public Analyst who reported that both the samples were adulterated and in addition, the coco burfee was misbranded products. After obtaining the sanction from the Assistant Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, the Food Inspector filed a complaint in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Corporation), Nagpur.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.