- (1.)THIS is a petition tiled under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. challenging the order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain in Criminal Case No. 1562/2003 on dated 3-10-2005, whereby an application filed on behalf of the petitioners for discharging them from the charges punishable under Section 7 (1) read with Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity) read with Rule 64-B of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for brevity), has been dismissed.
(2.)CRIMINAL Case No. 1562/2003 is pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain, on the basis of a complaint filed by Food Inspector, Ujjain for alleged violation of Section 7 (ii) read with Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Act read with Rule 42 (S) and 64-B of the Rules.
(3.)THE case of the prosecution in short is that Food Inspector, Ujjain purchased a sample of Maggi 2 Minutes Noodles from one Kishore Kumar Khemani, who is partner of M/s Khemani Brothers, 9 Daulatganj, Ujjain, after paying its cost. Petitioner No. 2 is the manufacturer of that product and Petitioner No. 1 is its nominated officer. One part of that sample was sent for examination to Public Analyst, who vide his report Annexure P-3 found that the sample was misbranded, as per Rule 42 (S) read with Rule 64b of the Rules. On the basis of this report as the sample was found misbranded, present petitioners and the seller arc being prosecuted before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain. In the report of Public Aanalyst presence of Mono-Sodium Glutamate was found in that sample, and as there was no statutory declaration about addition of Mono-Sodium Glutamate in the sample of Maggi 2 minutes noodles, thus public analyst opined the sample to be misbranded. Second part of the sample was sent to Central Food Laboratory for analysis and report Annexure P-4 was received, indicating that the sample was not found adulterated in respect of test mention in that report. On the basis of this report of Central Food Laboratory, a request was made to learned Trial Court for discharging the petitioners, but learned Trial Court dismissed that application filed by petitioners in this behalf and, therefore, this petition has been filed.