Ashok Kumar Chakraborty, J. - (1.) This application under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the Order dated 25.11.88 and 30.1.89 passed by the learned Metropolitan/Municipal Magistrate, 4th Court, Town Hall, Calcutta, in Case No. 131-D of 1981 of his Court by which he directed the framing of charge and framed charge against the petitioner under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of food Adulteration Act, 1954, (as amended by Act No. 34 of 1976) read with Section 7 of the said Act (hereinafter to the referred as the said Act.)
(2.) Facts of the case may be briefly stated as follows:- On 19.81 at about 11-45 a.m, the opposite party No. 2. D, Manchanda, since deceased, a Food Inspector of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation inspected the shop of the petitioner at No II-A/38 S S Hogg Market, Calcutta, and found an article of food, namely black-pepper (whole) weighing about 3 Kgs. stored and exposed for sale for human consumption. The Food Inspector purchased the said sample of the black-pepper ( whole) from the accused, who was the proprietor of the said shop, after due observance of all legal formalities. The Food Inspector divided the said sample in three equal parts, and sent one of the parts to the Public Analyst for analysis, and upon analysis of the said sample, by his report No. DC/121/81 dated 25.9.81, opined that as the sample of the black-pepper (whole) contained mineral oil, it is adulterated, The Food Inspector upon receipt of the report of the Public Analyst applied for written consent of the Health Officer. Calcutta Municipal Corporation for instituting prosecution against the petitioner and upon obtaining such permission, he filed a complaint before the learned Court under Section 20(1) of the said Act. The petitioner thereafter appeared before the learned Magistrate and applied, for sending another part of the sample to the Director, Central Food Laboratory for reanalysis and the learned Magistrate accordingly sent another part of the sample to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Gaziabad, for a certificate under Section 13(3) of the said Act. The Director, Central Food Laboratory, upon analysis of the said sample by his Certificate No. 125/March/82-WB dated 5.3.82, confirmed the report of the Public Analyst that the sample showed the presence of mineral oil which is not permissible. The Learned Magistrate thereafter upon consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and examining documents on record held by his order dated 25.11.88 that a prima facie case has been made out against the petitioner and on 30.1.89 framed charge under Section 16(l)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the said Act.
(3.) Facts stated above are not in dispute in this case.;