- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No. 195 of 1997, dated 23.01.2009. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has reversed the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court and has convicted and sentenced the accused persons for the offences punishable Under Ss. 7(1), 2(ia), (a) read with Sec. 16(1)(a) and (ii) and Sec. 7(i), 2(ia)(m) read with Sec. 16(1)(ai) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, "the PFA Act"). For the convenient disposal of both the appeals, we will notice the facts of Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2010 as the lead case.
(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the Accused No. 1 -M/s. Saibaba Toddy Company was a partnership firm doing business of selling toddy. The Accused No. 2 was looking after the business of the firm as partner, and Accused No. 3 was a helper working in the firm. On 29.01.1992 at 3:00 p.m. the Food Inspector visited the firm's toddy shop, where Accused No. 3 was present, and found 20 crates containing 12 bottles of toddy each. In the presence of Panch witnesses and Accused No. 3, the Food Inspector took 1,500 milliliters of toddy from the shop, and sealed the same in three bottles after adding preservatives.
(3.) A sample of the seized toddy was sent to the Public Analyst, Aurangabad for analysis. The report of the Public Analyst revealed that there was less quantity of alcohol in the toddy than permissible, and that the toddy was adulterated. The Food Inspector received consent letter to prosecute the accused persons on 14.10.1992, and thereafter filed a complaint against the accused persons before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbhani.;