V.K. Khanna, J. - (1.) This is an application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants under sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) The brief facts for the purposes of deciding the present application are that applicant No. 1 is a manufacturer of Vanaspati and applicant No. 2 is the Manager of applicant No. 1 and its nominee under section 17 (2) of the Act. On 21-5-1981 the Food Inspector took a sample of Vanaspati manufactured by applicant No. 1 and sent the same to the Public Analyst. The report of the Public Analyst was sent to the parties on 21-10-1980. 7-10-1981 was fixed for summoning the applicants before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Meerut before whom the complaint was filed. It is at this stage that the present application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed for quashing the criminal proceedings solely on the ground that the entire sealed-tin of Vanaspati had not been sent to the Public Analyst and in view of several decisions of this Court it was incumbent upon opposite party No. 2 to send the entire sealed tin of Vanaspati to the Public Analyst. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Devender Kumar and others, 1983 (1) F.A.C. 99 (S.C.) had occasion to consider rule 22-A of the rules framed under the Act. It has been held by the Supreme Court that rule 22-A of the rules does not state that where a sealed container contains a quantity larger than what is required for the purposes of Section 11 read with rule 22 the sealed container as such should be taken as sample and that no sample can be taken after opening the scaled container. It is therefore clear that the cases on which reliance was being placed by the applicants have been clearly over-ruled by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab (supra). The criminal proceedings therefore initiated against the applicants cannot be quashed on this ground.
(3.) The learned counsel for the applicants has in the end made a prayer that he be allowed to send the sample to the Central Food Laboratory. For that purpose they may move the required application before the court concerned who will dispose of the application in accordance with law.;