J.C.Gupta - (1.) -Heard Sri Sunil Kumar holding brief of Sri M. K. Gupta, for the applicant in revision and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) THE applicant in revision faced trial under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (here-in-after referred to as the 'Act') on a complaint filed before Special Judicial Magistrate, Mohammadabad, Ghazipur. As per the complaint case, on 25.11.1993 a sample of 'gram dal' was collected from the shop of accused applicant, which on analysis by public analyst was found to contain 1% 'dal kesari' (lathyrus sativus). In short, the allegation against the applicant in revision was that 'kesari dal', which is injurious to health, was mixed with gram dal and thus the gram dal was adulterated within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (a) as defined under Section 2 of the Act. The prosecution in support of its case examined P.W. 1, Food Inspector, Badri Prasad Gupta, P.W. 2, Sri A. N. Singh, Chief Medical Officer and P.W. 3, Sri Dhirendra Singh, Clerk, C.M.O. office. The case of applicant in revision before the Magistrate was that no sample was collected from his shop by the Food Inspector ; that there has been no compliance of the provisions of Section 13 (2) of the Act and that the complaint was bad for want of proper sanction. The learned Magistrate repelling all the contentions of the applicant in revision held him guilty under Section 7/16(I-A) (i) of the Act and sentenced him to one year rigorous imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant in revision filed Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1999 before the Special Judge, E.C. Act, Ghazipur. The learned Special Judge has dismissed the appeal by the impugned order dated 12.7.2001.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant in revision submitted before this Court that when an order of conviction is challenged in appeal, it is incumbent upon the appellate court to examine evidence and other material and record clear cut findings with regard to the arguments advanced and issues involved in the appeal. In the present case, it will be found that the lower appellate court has only made a mention of various submissions made on behalf of the convict appellant and also submissions made in reply from State side, but there has been no discussion of evidence nor any finding has been recorded on the issues as to whether there has been due compliance of the provisions of Section 13 (2) of the Act, whether there was a proper and valid sanction to prosecute the accused ; whether the sample in question was collected from the applicant's shop ; and whether the prosecution evidence was otherwise reliable. In the absence of clear-cut findings on the above issues, this Court is not in a position to examine the correctness, propriety or legality of the findings. The judgment of the lower appellate court also does not fulfil requirements as envisaged under Section 354, Cr. P.C. and thus, it is no judgment in the eye of law.;